
















N 




I 




I 










.3 v s 








tt/r : ojr t , 











































































i-j t»eh 








WHITE’S CONFUTATION 


CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 

AND 


CORRECT EXPOSITION 

or 

THE CATHOLIC FAITH, 

ON ALL POINTS OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE TWO 

CHURCHES. 


TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL (LATIN), 

BY EDMOND WM. O’MAHONEY, ESQ., 

MIDDLE TEMPLE, LONDON. 


“The man that with a stiff neck despiseth him that reprovethhim, shall sad* 
denly be destroyed : and health shall not follow him.” Proverbs xxix. 1. 

•* Have no fellowship with the unfaithful works of darkness, but rather 
reprove them.” Ephes. v. 11. 

•• Every man that spareth us, is not our friend— neither is every man that 
chastiseth us our enemy.” 

“ Better are the wounds of a friend than the deceitful kisses of an enemy.” 
Proverbs xxvii. 6. 

“ It is better to love and be severe, than to be lenient and act the deceiver.” 
Aua. vol. 2, Epist. 48, to Vincentius, on the Rogatian heresy. 


PHILADELPHIA : 

HENRY M’GRATII, No. 1 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET. 

1844 . 


We approve of the republication of the work styled Church-of- 
Englandism, being a learned work on the chief points of difference 
between the Catholic Church and the English communion. Written 
by a convert, it is especially useful at present, when public attention 
is directed to those points. 

t Francis Patrick, Bishop, Philadelphia. 

Phila. Feb. 7, 1844. 


V J -' * 

*• . 
4 6 


E. B. MEARS, STEREOTYPER. KING AND BAIRD, PRINTERS. 

- 


Exchange 

Peehan Menwrkl Library 
St. i-iiiry ot uic Lauc Scii.i.'.ary 


APPROBATION OF THE TREATISE. 

This Treatise, written by its profoundly learned Author, 
Alexander White, refutes upon ijie most solid principles, 
the English schism, and the heresies connected with it ; and 
at the same time accurately explains and most ably defends 
the doctrine of the Catholic Church, which is opposed 
to the said heresies. Wherefore, I pronounce it a work 
deserving, in the highest degree, of being printed and uni- 
versally circulated. 

Given under my hand at Louvain, this 1st day 
of September, 1661. 

Jacobus Pontanus. 


Approbation of the following Work by the Right Rev. 
Dr. French , Catholic Bishop of Ferns , who flourished 
soon after our Author. 

“Alexander White, a pious and learned person, bred 
in the Protestant religion, and for a long time the zealous 
defender of the Thirty-Nine Articles, hath refuted them so 
substantially, as to this day no man of the Church of Eng- 
land hath answered him. Such is my opinion, and that of 
the divines of my side, of the sound substance of this book, 
and the reasons, arguments, authorities of Scripture, apos- 
tolic tradition, councils, and fathers, he produceth, that 
I presume, without vanity, to give a challenge on the behalf 
of verity, and the Roman Catholic Church, to all in the 
three kingdoms who profess the Thirty-Nine Articles, to 
make answer to this book. Mr. White hath destroyed the 
Babel tower of your Thirty-Nine Articles, which you will 
never build up again ; this man’s ark hath cast down your 
Dagon — he hath impeached your new English creed of a 
treason against Heaven and verity. — Peruse seriously and 
sedato animo this learned book : one of two effects it will 
have, that either it will convert you or confound you. 

Nicholas French, L. B. F.” 

a 
















~ . v: "»r\f ;*r*in 










: " ' 


















THE AUTHOR’S PREFACE TO THE READER. 


No sooner shall this Treatise on the English 
schism be issued from the press, than it will fall 
into the hands of divers readers; some of 
them Catholics — others who are not Catholics. 
From the Catholics I have to request, that 
should they derive any advantage from read- 
ing it, they will return thanks to God on my 
behalf, and recommend me to him in their 
prayers — in order that the work of mercy and 
grace which He hath begun in me may be per- 
fected even unto the end. In exposing and re- 
futing the English schism, I principally use the 
authority of the ancients : and I do so for this 
reason — because many who are involved in that 
schism imagine, and lead others to believe, 
that the ancient fathers and doctors of the 
Catholic Church are upon their side, and pa- 
tronize their cause. 

The matter of which this Treatise is com- 
posed, and the plan therein adopted, will be 
found in the Work itself. 

Again, of my other readers, who are not 
Catholics — and particularly of those with whom 
I was at one time joined in schism, I have to 


vi author’s preface. 

entreat — that they will peruse this Treatise with 
the disposition of learning and not of pervert- 
ing the truth — that they will lay aside their 
prejudices, and listen to the voice of the an- 
cient teachers of truth and piety, from whom 
(under God) I have received my knowledge of 
the Catholic truth — and whose testimonies 
respecting this same truth I now candidly pro- 
duce from their writings, for the purpose of ex- 
posing and confounding schism, and for the 
conversion of schismatics. O Lord Jesus ! who 
through Thy grace and the testimonies of Thy 
servants respecting the truth, hast drawn me to 
Thee, who art the Truth; grant that through 
the same testimonies and the same grace, my 
brethren may be likewise drawn to Thee, that 
we may in truth and charity enjoy Thee, who 
art Truth and Charity. Grant, O Lord, that I 
may love Thee with perseverance, and hereaf- 
ter love no one except in Thee or for love of 
Thee. — “For happy is the man who loveth 
Thee, and his friend in Thee, and his enemy 
for love of Thee. For he alone loseth nothing 
that is dear, to whom all things are dear in 
Him who is never lost.” 1 

Alexander White. 

Louvain , August 23 d, 1661. 


Augustin’s Confess, vol. 1, book 4th, chap. 9. 


TO THE 


ROMAN CATHOLICS, CHURCH-OF-ENGLAND MEN, 


AND 

DISSENTERS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. 


Dear Fellow-Christians, 

As we hold, on the authority of Saint Paul, that there 
is but one God and one Faith,* and as all men have an 
equal interest in the salvation of their immortal souls, which 
must mainly depend on holding this true faith once deli- 
vered to the saints, and without which it is impossible to please 
God — I have, therefore, deemed it right to dedicate this Work 
to Christians of all denominations. For I sincerely believe, 
that— if read with the proper disposition — it is well calcu- 
lated to dissipate those doubts, and put a period to those 
unseemly differences, which, for the last three centuries, 
have unhappily distracted and divided the great Christian 
family of these kingdoms. To effect this so desirable 
object was the high and charitable purpose for which the 
learned author went through the immense labour required in 
order to produce the following inestimable Treatise; and to 
contribute to this same object, even in the most humble way, 
is what has induced me to devote myself to the rendering 
of it from Latin into the English language. 

The present work was written, nearly two hundred 
years ago, by the Rev. Alexander White, who was edu- 
cated in the bosom of the Church of England — was a minis- 
ter of that religion — the zealous defender of its doctrines — 
and the intimate friend of Charles the First, whom he then 
regarded as the visible Head of his Church. The author 


Ephesians iv. 5. 


7 


viii 


PREFACE. 


himself tells us, that until after Charles had been beheaded — 
when he left the kingdom and retired to the continent — he 
never once doubted the claim set up by the Church of Eng- 
land to being the true Church of Christ ; but after his de- 
parture from his native country, and when he found that 
wheresoever else he went, he could meet with no form of 
religion coinciding with that in which he had been brought 
up, he then began, rationally enough, to entertain doubts 
with respect to the justice of this claim. These doubts were by 
no means removed by turning his view to the state in which 
England was at the time involved. For he clearly saw 
that in case it pleased the caprice, or suited the political pur- 
poses of Cromwell to encourage any other form of religion 
in preference to the one established by law, he would have 
no hesitation in doing so; and that the religion of the Church 
of England — which he had hitherto considered to be the 
true one — should, in such event, incur the risk of utter de- 
struction. His reliance on the promises of Christ and his 
confidence in their fulfilment were, however, too strong to 
suffer him to believe that, because the narrowly-limited 
Church of England should cease to exist, therefore the 
Church of Christ — against which the gates of Hell never 
can prevail — should disappear along with it. 

Our Author, on perceiving that such was the monstrous 
absurdity to which the foregoing conclusion would lead him, 
immediately besought of Almighty God, in humble and fer- 
vent prayer, to direct him in discovering the Church which 
His Divine Son had descended from heaven to establish — 
and with which He abides and will continue to abide, even 
unto the consummation of the world. He devoutly perse- 
vered in addressing his earnest supplications to God for this 
purpose, promising at the same time that so soon as he 
should discover which was the church whereof His Divine 
Son was the Founder, so soon would he — regardless of all 
earthly considerations — join in its holy communion: but 
notwithstanding his vehement desire to find the truth, he was 
for a considerable time before he could even determine on 
the proper mode of arriving at it. His confusion was in- 
creased by the number and variety of the sects which even 
then distracted England ; and each of which would fain ar- 
rogate to itself the exclusive title of the Church of Christ— 


PREFACE. 


iX 


appeal to Scripture as the arbiter — and assert that the evi- 
dence of the sacred volume lay on its own side. But he knew 
that truth was permanent and invariable — that each of these 
could not be the true Church — and that if one amongst them 
were true, the rest should of necessity be false. For he belie- 
ved the Holy Scriptures to be the Word of God ; and he knew 
that the Holy Scriptures distinctly state, that as there is but 
one God, so there is but one Faith. He likewise knew from 
the same Divine source, that Jesus Christ had established a 
Church against which the gates of Hell never shall prevail — 
and which the Holy Ghost is to guide in all truth to the end 
of time. He always believed — for the Scripture so de- 
clares — that as there is only one Shepherd, so there is only 
one fold or true Church. For a long period of his life, 
he conceived that he was of this Fold, that he was a mem- 
ber of this true Church — the Spouse of Christ. But when 
he seriously reflected, and saw that the Church to which 
he belonged was founded upon human law, and depended 
for its success upon such precarious support, his mind be- 
came disquiet and unfixed ; and he resolved, with the assist- 
ance of the grace and blessing of God, to labour unceas- 
ingly until he should succeed in discovering which was The 
Catholic Church. 

Afier much time spent in deliberating on the best mode 
whereby to ascertain this all important fact, he at length 
determined on consulting the eminent fathers and doctors 
who flourished in the early ages of the Church. For it ap- 
peared to him, that, as these holy and learned men lived 
at a period remote from his age, they should therefore be 
free from the prejudices and party feelings that then prevail- 
ed — and should consequently be the most disinterested ad- 
visers and unerring guides whom he could follow. 

Having formed this resolution, he commenced a long and 
arduous course of study, during the progress of which he 
minutely searched, diligently compared, and carefully weigh- 
ed the texts of the Holy Scripture. He also read with the 
utmost attention the comments of the early fathers, doctors, 
and ecclesiastical historians upon the sacred volume — and 
he invariably noted down whatever appeared to him of im- 
portance, either in Scripture, the fathers, or in history. 
At length he terminated this course of study, which occupied 


X 


PREFACE. 


him for upwards of seven years ; and which, to use his own 
words, he concluded — “with great delight, but with still 
greater fruit and advantage.” 

When he had completed his protracted studies, he care- 
fully read over the texts of Scripture, and the notes which 
he had so choicely collected during all this time — com- 
pared them with the doctrines taught by the Church of Eng- 
land — them with those taught and maintained by the Church 
of Rome: and the result of all his inquiries, his study, and 
his deliberation was-— that he became convinced the doctrine 
taught by the church established by law in England was in 
many points opposed to — whilst that taught by the Church of 
Rome was in every particular the same as — the doctrine of 
the ancient Catholic Church , established by Jesus Christ, 
and propagated and continued by His apostles and their 
lawful successors. When convinced of these facts, our au- 
thor then unhesitatingly redeemed fte solemn promise he 
had made to his God — renounced the errors of his former 
way — and joined in communion w r ith the invariable Catho- 
lic Church— THE PILLAR AND THE GROUND OF 
TRUTH.* 

But after his conversion, he could not reconcile to himself 
that the valuable and important notes which he had collect- 
ed at the expense of so much time, labour, and solicitude, 
should remain unproductive. So he published the present 
Work, in which these notes are embodied, and which con- 
tains the entire substance of all that he had read during 
the seven years devoted by him to this most laudable un- 
dertaking. He published it, firstly, in order that Christians 
of all denominations might have the benefit of his labours; 
but principally, that his English brethren, for whose recon- 
version he burned with an apostolic zeal, might be again 
brought back to the fold of unity. He knew that strong pre- 
judices existed in their minds against the Catholic Church — 
and that pride, fashion, and temporal interest operated power- 
fully in keeping them estranged from it. He felt it his duty, 
therefore, to warn them of their imminent danger : but in 
doing so, he addresses them, not in invective, but in the lan- 
guage of remonstrance and conciliation. He spares no pains 


* 1 Tim. iii. 15. 


PREFACE. 


Xl 


in order to bring conviction to their minds — and where he 
modestly conceives his own reasoning to be weak, he con- 
firms it by adducing the testimonies of the greatest historians, 
and the most learned and holy men the world ever produced. 

In referring to authorities, however, he chiefly confines 
himself to those of the first five centuries; because he 
considered that they would have a greater weight with his 
English brethren, who admit the validity of the first four 
General Councils — the purity of the doctrine of the Ro- 
man Catholic Church for the first six hundred years — and 
who entertain a respect and veneration for the holy fathers 
who flourished within that period. The plan he has fol- 
lowed is one which, I am sure, will be admired by all. It 
is equally applicable in the present time as it was in his — 
and I am induced to believe that if Roman Catholics and 
Church-of-England men would only divest themselves of 
those prejudices that distract the mind, and obscure men’s 
reason, the differences subsisting between them might easily 
be reconciled, and their disputes for ever set at rest. I am 
the more confirmed in this opinion when I reflect that the 
Church-of England man, as well as the Roman Catholic, 
admits the Creed of Saint Athanasius, the Apostle’s Creed, 
and the Nicene Creed.* In the first place, then, both admit 
the Creed of Saint Athanasius, whereby they are obliged, 
under pain of everlasting death, to hold, “ before all things , 
the Catholic Faith” Secondly, they admit the Apostles’ 
Creed, wherein each makes a solemn profession to his God, 
that he believes in **■ the Catholic Church .” And thirdly, 
they both hold the Nicene Creed, in repeating which they de- 
clare their belief in “ One Catholic Church.” Hence it is evi- 
dent that all the differences subsisting between them resolve 
themselves into this simple question — which is the One Ca- 
tholic Church ? The Roman Catholic maintains, that his is 
this Church ; for that it is the one established by Jesus Christ 
— cemented by his Blood — guided in all truth by the Holy 
Ghost — and which is to continue without interruption to the 

* In the Book of Common Prayer, Article the 8th, entitled “ Of 

the three Creeds,” we read as follows — “The three Creeds, Nicene 
Creed, Athanasius’s Creed, and that which is commonly called the 
Apostles’ Creed, ought throughly to be received — for they may be 
proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture.” 


Xll 


PREFACE. 


end of time. — The Church-of-England man says, on the 
other hand, that such was the Roman Catholic Church for- 
merly ; but that it has since fallen into error — and that the 
Protestant Church as now established by law in England, 
is the ancient Catholic Church as it was previously to its 
falling into error. Such simply is the whole substance of 
the difference between them. They both agree that it is 
necessary to believe in the One Catholic Church — and 
differ only as to which this One Church is. Oh ! if men 
really desirous of discovering the truth, would but approach 
the subject with calm and dispassionate minds, how easy 
would it not be for them to determine so simple a fact — a 
fact than which thousands of a more complicated, though 
none- of a more important nature, are every day decided by 
historical evidence alone ! 

The author of this Work had a mind too comprehensive 
not to perceive that this was the real question with which 
he bad to grapple ; and once perceiving it, he was too ardent, 
sincere and persevering to desist from his search until he had 
satisfied himself upon the subject whereon he had instituted 
inquiry. The surest — indeed the only unerring mode — of 
deciding this fact, appears to be the one adopted by him in 
his own instance — namely, a reference to the writings of the 
‘primitive fathers and early historians, wherein are record- 
ed the doctrines held by the Christian world in the respect- 
ive ages during which those writers flourished ; and then 
a comparison instituted between the doctrines recorded by 
them and the doctrines held by the Christian societies of 
the present day. 

If the reader, let him belong to what denomination of 
Christians he may, wish to imitate the salutary example 
set him by the author of this Work, and be desirous of sa- 
tisfying his own mind as to which is “ the One Catholic 
Church ,” he need only appeal to the eminent writers who 
flourished during the first six centuries — and the substance 
of their testimony and belief upon the different points of 
faith, he will find collected within the moderately sized vol- 
ume he now holds in his hand. The authorities quoted in this 
Treatise must be respected by every scholar, by every man 
with any pretensions to learning : for they are the brightest 
names that illustrate the historic page. 1 shall draw up, 


PREFACE. 


xiii 

and place in the appendix, a list of the fathers, historians, 
and councils referred to throughout this Treatise ; and, for 
the greater convenience of my readers, shall note opposite 
the names of the fathers and historians the period in which 
they flourished — and opposite the councils, the dates at 
which they were holden. 

The test here proposed must, I feel confident, appear to 
all whcrhave read the preceding pages, a sufficient one, and 
the best and most satisfactory, whereby to decide the respec- 
tive claims set up by each of the Christian societies to being 
the “ One Catholic Church” professed by them in their 
common creeds. And it surely is needless for me, when 
addressing Christians, to dwell on the grievous and manifold 
evils produced by leaving this question undecided ; or to 
expatiate on the immense advantages that would accrue to 
this great Christian empire from having it satisfactorily ad- 
justed — and unity of religious sentiment thereby restored. 
Nothing, indeed, can be more obvious than the evils arising 
to Christianity for want of the principle of unity subsisting 
among its professors. And is it not, to say the least of it, 
an unseemly thing to see the great Christian family split 
and divided as it now is ? Do not the divisions existing 
among Christians afford a secret triumph to the deist and 
the atheist ? When they see us Christians engaged in end- 
less and uncharitable contentions, does not our conduct lead 
them to mock the very name of Christ, which we profess to 
venerate? And if a Christian attempt to convert any one 
of them, will he not readily reply — “ Go, sir, and become 
reconciled to your brother Christian in faith before you 
come to convert me?” Again, when our zealous mis- 
sionaries, bursting through all the ties that bind them to 
country and to kindred, expose their lives in foreign cli- 
mates ; are not their exertions constantly paralyzed by the 
divisions existing among ourselves? For, suppose that two 
men are introduced to a pagan — both professing to be minis- 
ters of the same Christ — and yet want the pagan to believe 
doctrines contradictory one to the other ; is it to be won- 
dered if he disbelieve them both, and be the more confirmed 
in his own opinion, because of the differences existing be- 
tween the Christian ministers? The case here supposed is 
no extravagant one ; but, on the contrary, is, alas ! one of 
2 


XIV 


PREFACE. 


daily occurrence. It is also a well authenticated fact, that 
difference of opinion in matters of religion existing among 
Christian missionaries, diverts their mind from the great ob- 
ject for which they are sent out — namely, the conversion of 
the benighted pagan. For, instead of directing their undi- 
vided attention to the enlightenment of the unconverted, their 
time is rather consumed in endeavouring to gain over, each 
to his own particular opinions, the pagans already convert- 
ed by the other: and thus the grand object of their mission 
is either partially or wholly neglected. These are but a few 
of the manifold evils arising from our unseemly divisions, 
so unbecoming in followers of the God of unity — ‘ Who 
broke down the middle wall of partition , and of two 
made one.' F/phes. ii. 14. 

The more all good Christians dwell upon the evils arising 
from disunion, and on the great and manifold advantages 
which should result from the restoration of unity, but which 
the necessarily restricted limits of a preface (that I fear is 
already growing too long) prevent me from detailing ; the 
more will they desire the arrival of that happy day when 
they may apply the language of the Divine Scripture to the 
state of these United Kingdoms, and joyfully exclaim with 
the Christians of the apostolic age — ‘ The multitude of the 
believers have but one heart and one spirit.’ Acts iv. 32. I 
verily believe the present book to be well calculated for 
the promotion of this most desirable end. The author of 
it, imitating the example of Saint Paul, when the scales fell 
from his eyes and he was enabled to see the light, sought 
admission into the Church which he had before assailed ; 
but he did not on joining its communion vilify and calum- 
niate the religion he had left, as is the uncharitable course 
too frequently pursued by those who quit the pale of the 
Catholic Church — and who pursue this course for the pur- 
pose of manifesting, as it were, that they are the very per- 
sons pointed out by the apostle, when he says — ‘ These 
are they who separate themselves, sensual men, having not 
the spirit .’ Jude xix. In order to afford my readers an idea 
of how widely different a feeling actuated our author towards 
his former associates in belief, whose communion conscien- 
tious motives obliged him to abandon, I shall here append 
the paragraph with which he piously closes the present 


PREFACE. 


XV 


Work — and the fervent and charitable sentiment breathed 
throughout which is well worthy the imitation of those who 
seek to gain others over to their faith : — 

“ O Father of mercies ! O Father of lights ! from whom 
is every best and every perfect gift — may my brethren, 
through the Spirit of truth and for love of' thy Son, who is 
the way and the truth, be brought into the way of truth. 
Thou who art Charity, through the Spirit of Charity, gather 
them together in unity — that we being all unanimous, may, 
in the Catholic Church, with one voice, chant in canticles the 
greatness of thy mercy and of thy grace ; and offer sacri- 
fices of praise to Thee, and to thy Son, and to the Holy 
Ghost, in truth and charity, for ever and ever. Amen.” 

If at any time since the first appearance of the original 
of this Work, which was published so far back as the year 
of our Lord 1661 , there was a prospect of the foregoing 
pious prayer producing its desired effect, that time is as- 
suredly the present. For a spirit of inquiry is now abroad — 
the people of England are every day becoming more and 
more resolved on satisfying their minds as to which is the 
religion established by Christ — which the creed of their 
pious and sainted forefathers — which that faith wherewith 
the brightest glories of their nation are associated. This 
inquiry is constantly producing the happiest results, and 
leading fast to the restoration of unity and religious peace. 
Within the last few years, many from among the highest 
and most distinguished Protestant families in England have 
regularly examined all the way back to the very origin of 
the Christian Church — and then, on arriving at the fountain 
head and discovering the truth of the long proscribed and 
persecuted Catholic faith, have readily embraced its doc- 
trines ; and numbers of them by so doing have attested the 
purity of their motives and the sincerity of their belief — for 
it frequently happens that by the very fact of joining in com- 
munion with the Catholic Church, they blast their temporal 
prospects — forfeit both wealth and patronage — and in many 
instances have to sacrifice the love and friendship of those 
who are nearest and dearest to them in life. Neither is this 
spirit of inquiry confined to any particular class of the Eng- 
lish people — it extends itself far and wide over the entire 
kingdom — and we behold at the present day the most talented 


XVI 


PREFACE. 


and erudite of the professors and divines of England’s Pro- 
testant universities entering seriously on the search, and in 
their own instances setting the laudable example to all their 
fellow-believers, and saying to them, as it were, “go ye and 
do likewise.” The author of this Work, once a Protestant 
clergyman, and the defender of the Thirty-Nine Articles, 
did, nearly two hundred years ago, what they are doing now. 
He inquired into and discovered which was the religion of 
the primitive Christians, and on beholding its resplendent 
truth, he immediately joined communion with the Church 
of antiquity — the Spouse of Christ. The Treatise that he 
has bequeathed to posterity, and which now, for the first 
time, makes its appearance in an English garb, will, I con- 
fidently trust, prove well calculated to aid others in pro- 
secuting, and bringing to a happy close, this same important 
inquiry. And should they, as he, become convinced that 
their present way is erroneous, and be enabled to look stead- 
fastly at the dazzling light of truth, I most sincerely hope that, 
strengthened by the Divine grace, they too may exhibit the 
same firmness of mind, and give the same unequivocal proof 
of their gratitude to an all-merciful God. Fervently uniting, 
then, in the spirit of our author’s prayer, and sincerely 
hoping that we may all live in unity here, and dwell in 
peace hereafter, 

I remain, my dear fellow-Christians, 

Your devoted servant, 
EDMOND WM. O’MAHONEY. 

Middle Temple , London. 

May 1«£, 1841. 


TABLE OF CONTENTS. 


Chap. I. Introduction to the Treatise, . Page 21 

II. On Schism in general, ... 27 

III. On Schism in particular, ... 28 

IV. On the division of Schism — and whether 

Schism be joined with Heresy 1 . . 29 

V. The etymology of the word Heresy consi- 
dered — and its nature investigated, . 31 

VI. Whether Schismatics and Heretics be in the 

Catholic Church 1 .... 33 

VII. The course pursued by Heretics and Schis- 
matics is exposed, in order that they them- 
selves be avoided, .... 38 

VIII. The reason which induced the author to 

embrace the Catholic Faith, . . 42 

IX. The Doctrine on which the Church of Eng- 

land is founded, .... 44 

X. The Thirty-Seventh Article of the Church 

of England examined, ... 46 

XI. The Doctrine contained in the latter para- 
graph of the preceding chapter, is con- 
firmed by the testimonies of Catholics of 
the Latin Church, .... 47 

XII. The same Doctrine is confirmed by the tes- 
timonies of Catholics of the Greek Church, 56 

XIII. The same Doctrine is supported by the tes- 

timony and authority of the Councils, 62 

XIV. The same Doctrine is proved from the prac- 

tice of the Apostolic Chair, and the sub- 
ject at length concluded, ... 67 

XV. The Doctrine comprised in the Second 
conclusion of the Thirty-Seventh Article 
is examined and confuted, . . 71 


2 * 


17 


xvm 


CONTENTS 


XVI. The Doctrine of the Thirty-Seventh Article 

comprised in the Third conclusion, is 
examined — and rejected as absurd, . 83 

XVII. Examination of the Sixth Article, entitled 

“ Of the Sufficiency of the Scripture,” 85 
XVIII. Examination of the Ninth Article, entitled 

“ Of Original Sin,” ... 95 

XIX. Examination of the Eleventh Article, enti- 
tled “ Of the Justification of Man,” . 100 

XX. Examination of the Thirteenth Article, en- 
titled “ Of Works before Justification,” 103 

XXI. Examination of the Fourteenth Article, en- 

titled “ Of Works of Supererogation,” 108 

XXII. Examination of the Nineteenth Article, en- 

titled “ Of the Church,” . . 122 

XXIII. Examination of the Twenty-First Article, 
entitled “ Of the Authority of General 

Councils,” 132 

XXIV. Examination of the Twenty-Second Article, 

entitled “ Of Purgatory,” . . 144 

Section the First, on Purgatory, . . 145 

Section the Second, on Indulgences, . 151 

Section the Third, on the Respect and Ve- 
neration due to Images, . . 157 

Section the Fourth, on the Veneration of 
the Relics of the Martyrs and Saints, 169 

Section the Fifth, on the Invocation of Saints, 171 

XXV. Examination of Article the Twenty -Fourth, 
entitled “ Of Speaking in the Congrega- 
tion,” - 182 

XXVI. Examination of the Twenty-Fifth Article, 

entitled “Of the Sacraments,” . 189 

Section the First, on the Sacrament of Con- 
firmation, . . . . . 191 

Section the Second, on the Sacrament of 
Penance, ..... 200 

Subsection the First, of Contrition, 203 
Subsection the Second, of Confession, 207 
Subsection the Third, of Satisfaction, 215 
Section the Third, of the Sacrament of 
Extreme Unction, . . . 223 


CONTENTS. xix 

Section the Fourth, of the Sacrament of 

Order, 232 

Section the Fifth, of the Sacrament of Mar- 
riage, ...... 243 

XXVII. Examination of the Twenty-Eighth Article, 

entitled “Of the Lord’s Supper,” . 251 

XXVIII. Examination of Article the Twenty-Ninth, 
entitled “ Of the Wicked which do not 
eat the Body of Christ,” . . 272 

XXIX. Examination of the Thirtieth Article, enti- 
tled “ Of Both Kinds, . . . 279 

XXX. Examination of the Thirty-First Article, 

entitled “ Of Christ’s One Oblation,” 285 

XXXI. Examination of the Thirty-Second Article, 

entitled “ Of the Marriage of Priests,” 306 

XXXII. The Thirty-Fourth Article examined, which 
is entitled “Of the Traditions of the 

Churfch,” 318 

Conclusion Of the Treatise, wherein the 
author exhorts his Protestant Brethren to 
return to the Peace of the Catholic 
Church, . . • . . 323 





























.* 










w • » « 












































































































































v 


WHITE’S CONFUTATION 


OF 

CHURCH-OF-EN GLAND ISM. 


CHAPTER I. 

Introduction to the Treatise. 

Moved by the grace of God, I now enter on the con- 
futation of that Schism in which, alas ! I lived for 
many years. I lived in it, it is true, not so much of 
my own choice as owing to the effects of a corrupt 
education : for educated in schism from my infancy, 
I embraced error instead of truth — a sect instead of 
the Church. Yet I adore the bounty of Divine Pro- 
vidence in affording me a liberal education. For by 
means of the education which I received, and the as- 
sistance of the grace and blessing of God, not only 
was I restrained from the commission of many wicked 
crimes into which others plunged ; but, also, the gloom 
of ignorance being dispelled, my mind was gradually 
prepared for embracing the true Catholic Faith. 

After the nefarious regicide of Charles the First, 
King of Great Britain, to whose party I had always 
attached myself, I quitted the kingdom, and during 
my sojourn abroad, began seriously to reflect on the 
great and manifold perils from which, through the 
mercy of God, I had already escaped. These consider- 
ations led me to think on the vanity, the uncertainty, the 
brief and fleeting duration of earthly joys and posses- 
sions, in the idle pursuit of which so much labor is 


22 


white’s confutation 


expended, and so much anxiety felt, by the great bulk 
of mankind; and whilst in this salutary frame of mind, 
I entered into the resolution of using for the future 
greater diligence in securing true and eternal happi- 
ness than I had theretofore employed. One thing, 
however, caused me the greatest possible uneasiness — 
namely, that I knew not with which Church to asso- 
ciate myself. I believed in the existence of only one 
true Church ; but which that one was, I knew not. I 
did not, indeed, at that time, doubt but that the Church 
which the King, and the Bishops of his persuasion, had 
defended, and with which I had always held commu- 
nion, was a true part of the Church ; but I could not 
find such a Church out of my own country. I thought 
it possible that that Church might never be restored ; 
but it appeared to me most absurd to say, the Uni- 
versal Church should perish with it I vehemently 
desired to find the truth ; but my mind fluctuated as 
to the mode of arriving at it. I supplicated Almighty 
God to grant me his assistance in this important affair, 
and pondered in my mind many considerations re- 
garding it : but for the space of several months I was 
unable to arrive at any fixed conclusion. At length, 
after the most serious consideration, and after gravely 
and repeatedly reflecting on various plans, my mind 
became impressed with the absolute necessity of adopt- 
ing the following — namely, that I should consult the 
F athers and Doctors of the primitive Church, of w hose 
fidelity and piety I could entertain no doubt, and who, 
because they flourished at a period so remote from 
our contentious times, I concluded w r ere wholly free 
from party zeal, and should on that account be deemed 
impartial witnesses. 

I determined, therefore, to devote some years to this 
study, firmly resolved on embracing the doctrine of 
Faith handed down by them, and on joining commu- 
nion with whatever Church I should find teaching the 
same doctrine at the present day. After a course of 
reading which occupied seven years, and which, by 


OF CHUItCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


23 


the grace of God, I concluded with great delight, but 
with still greater fruit and advantage, I carefully read 
over the notes that I had choicely extracted during 
my previous course of study. Then, on comparing 
the doctrine of Faith handed down by the primitive 
Catholic Church with that of the Church of England 
(to which I had before belonged), I found the former 
in many points at open variance with the latter ; but 
discovered it to be the very same as that which the 
Roman Catholic Church teaches and promulgates at 
the present day. Wherefore, I was at the same time 
affected with sorrow and joy ; with sorrow, because 
I had so long lived in schism — with joy, that I should 
at length, by the Divine mercy and grace, be freed 
from it. I immediately fled from schism, and of my 
own accord, presented myself as a suppliant suing for 
peace from the Church — and this I obtained accord- 
ing to the usual form of reconciliation. 

Now that I have obtained my own reconciliation, I 
am induced to publish this Treatise, for two reasons 
especially ; one of which regards myself — the other 
my neighbor. One regards myself; for whilst I pub- 
licly refute the English schism, I also publicly declare 
myself to have been formerly ignorant and foolish. I 
lament, indeed, that I should have lived so long in 
ignorance and folly, yet I am not ashamed to confess 
it publicly — knowing that the more emphatically I 
declare my own misery and iniquity, the more do I 
magnify in my own particular instance, the mercy 
and grace of God. Sorrow for sins committed, and 
a public confession of them, avail much to the peni- 
tent ; but the ruinous and deadly false shame of con- 
fessing sins, weighs the sinner down to hell. St. 
Augustin severely rebukes this false shame in the 
Schismatic Vincentius — “Why,” he asks him, “do 
you still hesitate to profess what you believe, unless 
because you are confounded at having formerly be- 
lieved or defended a doctrine which you do not now 
believe ; and whilst you are ashamed to confess your 


24 WHITE’S CONFUTATION 

error, why are you not ashamed to persevere in error, 
which certainly is a thing far more shameful V 9 This 
is a subject on which the Scripture also is far from 
being silent — ‘There is a confusion leading to sin, 
and there is a confusion leading to grace and glory / 1 
Confusion leads to sin, when a man is ashamed to 
change an erroneous opinion, lest he be deemed incon- 
sistent; or lest, upon his own showing, he be pro- 
nounced to have remained long in error. ‘ Thus do 
they go down alive into hell’* — “ alive,” that means, 
conscious that they are the authors of their own per- 
dition ; and that there would be persons of this de- 
scription, was long ago foreshown in the case ol 
Core, Dathan and Abiron, who were swallowed up 
in an opening of the earth . 2 But confusion leads to 
grace and glory, when a man blushes at his own in- 
iquity, does penance, and amends his life ; which it 
grieveth you, who are wholly under the influence of 
that pernicious shame, to do, lest men who know not 
the meaning of the words should object against you 
the following verse of Saint Paul — ‘ If I build up 


i Eccles. iv. 25. 

*Ps. liv. 16. The late Hebrew doctors divide the ninth psalm 
into two, thereby making the twenty-second verse the commence- 
ment of the tenth Psalm. They afterwards join the 146th and 147th 
Psalms, in order that the whole number should not exceed 150. In 
the Protestant Bible, the Psalms are numbered after the same man- 
ner, with this difference — that the tenth Psalm is made to begin 
with the twenty-Jirst instead of the twenty-second verse of the 
ninth. Hence that which is now quoted as the 54th Psalm, and 
16th verse of the Catholic Bible, is to be found in the Protestant 
version under the head of the 55th Psalm and 15th verse. The 
same observation applies to all the other Psalms from the 9th to the 
146th. 

1 have deemed it necessary to affix this note for the guidance of 
my Protestant readers, who, I am satisfied, will be many. Indeed, 
of this I have already a positive assurance in the number and high 
respectability of those who have favored this work with their pat- 
ronage and support, and who have thereby given an earnest proof 
of their readiness and determination to read and judge for them- 
selves. 

2 Numb. xvi. 


v 


OP CHURCH~OF“ENGLANDISM, 


25 


again the things I have destroyed, I make myself a 
prevaricator.’ 1 2 But if these words could be urged 
against men who, when converted, proclaim the truth 
which, while perverse, they assailed, they could then 
be advanced against Saint Paul himself, in whom the 
churches of Christ magnified God, on hearing that 
he preached the faith which he before endeavoured 
to destroy. 8 

The other reason that incites me to write, proceeds 
from commiseration for my neighbor. How afflicted 
is my soul as often as I call to mind, that they who 
were the partners of my numerous and severe trials 
still persevere in the crime of schism — and are on 
that account wretched ! Formerly I loved myself and 
them in the communion of schism ; wherefore it is 
evident that I hated, not loved, myself and them — for 
4 he that loveth iniquity, hateth his own soul,’ 3 and he 
that loves others in sin, hates their souls. But now 
through means of God’s grace, I love myself in the 
communion of Catholic Truth and Charity, and I 
vehemently desire to love them in the same commu- 
nion. It is for this reason that I reprove their schism, 
whereby they are precluded from this communion, 
and I debarred of my wished-for delight. “ The 
more,” says St. Augustin, “ vice displeases us, the less 
do w r e wish the wicked to die unamended. For it 
is an easy thing, and agreeable to our inclination, to 
hate the wicked, because they are wicked ; but it is 
a rare and pious thing so to love them because they 
are men, as that you at the same time censure the 
guilt and reverence the nature in the same individual : 
and you will hate the guilt the more justly because 
the nature which you love is dishonoured by it.” 4 
These are the words of Augustin. 

1 Galat. ii. 18. 

2 August. Tom. 2, Epist. 48, Vincen. ex Hseresi Rogatiana, versus 
finem. 

s p s . x. 6. 4 August. Tom. 2, Epist. 54. Macedonio. 

3 


26 


white’s confutation 


Such of my brethren as abandon schism, and re- 
turn to the communion of the Catholic Church, will 
also love me in that communion ; but they who per- 
severe in schism, will recompense me as the Corinthians 
recompensed Saint Paul, who burned with a divine 
charity towards them. For when writing to them, 
he says, ‘And I most gladly will* spend, and be spent 
myself for your souls , — whereunto he immediately 
adds — ‘ although loving you more, I be loved less / 1 
Neither did he receive a better reward from the Ga- 
latians, when addressing whom he thus writes : “ Am 
I then become your enemy, because I tell you the 
truth V ’ 2 My brethren may recompense me as they 
please, yet will I act towards them as charity pre- 
scribes. I will reprove their schism, publicly expose 
the heresy and other deadly errors in which they are 
involved — I will exhort them to peace and commu- 
nion with the Catholic Church, and I hope that some, 
at least, will yield the desired fruit : not, indeed, that 
I rely on my own weakness, but upon the virtue of 
Christ, who, as the Apostle says — ‘ Hath chosen the 
weak things of this world, that he may confound the 
strong / 3 Wherefore St. Augustin, considering these 
words of the Apostle, says : — “ Should a learned man 
be chosen, perhaps he would say he was so chosen, 
because he deserved to be chosen for his learning. 
Our Lord Jesus Christ, wishing to humble the necks 
of the proud, sought not to convert the fisherman by 
means of the orator; but gained the Emperor by means 
of the fisherman. Cyprian, the great orator, believed ; 
but before him Peter the fisherman — through whom 
not only the orator, but the emperor, too, afterwards 
believed. No noble was at first elected, no learned 
man; for the weak things of the world hath God cho- 
sen, that he may confound the strong /’ 4 So far Au- 


1 2 Cor. xii. 15. a Galat. iv. 16. 3 l Cor. i. 27. 

■i August. Tom. 9, Exposit. in Evan. Joannis, Tract. 7. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 27 

gustin. I add, that as Christ did before, and frequent- 
ly, though not always, so doth he in the present day. 

Relying then, not on my own strength, but on the 
assistance of Christ, I descend into the arena. I will 
reprove, as I have already said, the English schism — 
I will publicly expose the heresy and other deadly er- 
rors in which my brethren are implicated — I will ex- 
hort them to peace and communion with the Catholic 
Church : but before so doing, I shall offer a few pre- 
fatory observations on the nature of schism and heresy, 
and on the morals of schismatics and heretics. 


CHAPTER II. 

On Schism in General. 

Schism, which is derived from the Greek verb 
<**<£», if the etymology of the word be considered, 
signifies a cutting-off; and as heretics, equally as 
schismatics, cut themselves off from the Catholic 
Church, they can, by a generic term, be said to form 
a schism. “ You behold,” saith St. Augustin, “ many 
persons cut off from the stem of the Christian society 
(which by a steady and unfailing propagation extends 
itself throughout the world, by means of the Aposto- 
lic sees and the uninterrupted succession of bishops), 
boasting, like withered branches, of a mere resem- 
blance to their original, and glorying in the empty 
title of Christianity — all which persons we classify 
under the heads of heretics and schismatics .” 1 How- 
ever, as the heretic separates himself from the church 
for one cause, the schismatic for another, we do not 
deem it foreign from our present undertaking to in- 
vestigate separately the nature of schism and heresy. 


i August, tom. 2, Epist. 42, ad Madaurenses. 


28 


white’s confutation 


CHAPTER III. 

Of Schism in particular. 

Separation from the church can be effected, either 
by teaching or holding doctrines contrary to what she 
believes ; or by dissolving the unity of the church 
through disobedience or rebellion. The former begets 
heresy, the latter schism — which is a rupture of the 
unity of the church by the withdrawal of obedience 
from the Pastor , in those matters that appertain to 
the duties of his office. 

Schismatics do not openly and avowedly withdraw 
obedience from Christ, the Prince of Pastors , 1 for 
they know this would be incompatible with the pro- 
fession of His name, which is retained by them all. 
But when they refuse subjection to the pastors subor- 
dinate to this Prince, they are accounted schismatics 
by Him, whose will it is that they should be subject 
both to himself and those ordained by him . 2 F or Christ 
gave to these pastors the ministry of reconciliation ; 3 
and whatever regards the increase and edification of 
his body, which is the church, by them it is wrought . 4 
Wherefore, they who despise them, are regardless of 
their own salvation : ‘For they watch,’ says the Scrip- 
ture, ‘ as being to render an account for your souls .’ 6 
St. Cyprian writes beautifully on this subject : “ I 
•boast not of these things,” saith he, “ but with grief 
do I utter them, when you set yourself up as the judge 
of God and Christ, who says to his Apostles, and 
through them to all the pastors who succeed the Apos- 
tles in vicarious ordination — ‘ He that heareth you. 
heareth me, and he that heareth me, heareth him that 
sent me. And he that despiseth you, despiseth me, 
and despiseth him that sent me.’ — Wherefore, you 
should know that the bishop is in the church, and the 


1 1 Peter v. 4, & Heb. iii. 1. * Acts xx. 28, &, Ileb. xiii. 17. 

8 2 Cor. v. 18 4 Ephcs. iv. 11, 12, 13, 14. « Hcb. xiii. 17. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENCLANDISM. 29 

church in the bishop ; that if any one be not with the 
bishop, he is not in the church ; and that those per- 
sons flatter themselves in vain, who, not being at peace 
with the priests of God, creep on stealthily, and con- 
ceive themselves to be in a kind of lurking communion 
with some individuals or other — for the church which 
is Catholic is only one, and cannot be parted or di- 
vided, but is indeed connected and bound together by 
a chain of priests indissolubly linked one with the 
other. Wherefore, brother, if you reflect on the ma- 
jesty of God who ordains priests — if you at all respect 
Christ, who, by his will and pleasure, and even by his 
presence , governs the clergy, and the church with its 
clergy ,” 1 &c. Vide Ignatii Epist. ad Trallianos. 


CHAPTER IV. 

On the Division of Schism — and whether Schism be 
joined with Heresy ? 

Schism may be of a two-fold nature — the one 
whereby obedience is withdrawn from the Supreme 
Pontiff; the other whereby it is immediately with- 
drawn from the inferior pastors. We are furnished 
with an example of the latter in the case of the Dona- 
tists, who at first only withdrew from Csecilianus, 
Bishop of Carthage, as can be seen in Optatus, of Mi- 
Ievis . 2 An example of the former is afforded us in 
the case of the Novatians, who seceded from Cornelius, 
the Roman Pontiff, as is shown by St. Cyprian . 3 St. 
Cyprian testifies, and experience corroborates his tes- 
timony, that of all schisms, that whereby obedience is 
withdrawn from the Supreme Pontiff, is tl .e most dan- 
gerous to the Catholic Church : “ Heresies,” says St. 


1 Cyprianus, Epist. 69, ad Flor. Pupian. 

2 Optat. Milev. lib. 1, de Schismate Donatistratum adv. Parmen. 

3 Cyprianus, Epist. 67, ad Steph. Pap. Read the 16th chapter of 
Numbers. 

3 * 


30 


white’s confutation 


Cyprian, “ have arisen, and schisms sprung from no 
other cause than the refusal of obedience to the Priest 
of God ; and because men do not take into considera- 
tion, that there is for the time one priest in the Church, 
and one judge in the stead of Christ .” 1 And indeed 
God himself clearly manifests the abhorrence in which 
he holds this crime, when he commands that those 
guilty of treasonable resistance to the pontifical au- 
thority, under the Old Testament, should be punished 
with the material sword ; 2 and that such as thus offend 
under the New should be punished with the spiritual . 3 

Though, speculatively speaking, inveterate schism 
might subsist without heresy — since, owing to the 
peculiar character of each, they must be, even when 
found together, necessarily distinct ; yet morally 
speaking, the former is hardly in any instance sepa- 
rated from the latter. “ Between heresy and schism,” 
says St. Jerom, “ this difference is alleged to exist — 
that heresy implies a perverse doctrine ; but that 
schism is the act of separation from the church on 
account of episcopal dissension. This distinction, 
it is true, may to a certain extent be admitted when 
applied in the commencement of a schism ; but every 
schism forms for itself in its progress some species of 
heresy, in order to exhibit a plausible ground for its 
original separation from the church .” 4 This opinion 
is confirmed by St. Augustin, when he says, “ Heresy 
is indeed an inveterate schism .” 5 And although 
Eiphanius — who, either because of some virtues which 
he admired in them, or because of their cunning con- 
cealment of their errors, was prevented from a just 
and accurate investigation of the erroneous opinions 
maintained by the Meletians and the Audians — would 


1 Cyprianus, Epist. 55, ad Cor. Pap. 

2 Deut. xvii. 12. 3 Mat. xviii. 17. 

4 Hieron. Comment, in Epist. ad Titum, cap. 3. 

6 August. Tom. 7, lib. 2. Contra Cresconium Grammaticum, 

cap. 7. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


31 


fain exculpate the first-named in the beginning of their 
schism, and the latter all through, from the guilt of 
heresy j 1 yet other writers, after a more profound ex- 
amination, discovered that in the progress of their 
schisms, they had become infected with this crime. 

For an account of the Meletians, see Philastrius on 
the heresies that existed under the Apostles, Heresy 
42. Respecting the Audians, see Theodoret’s Eccle- 
siastical History, Book 4, c. 9, of the heretical fables 
of the Audians. 


CHAPTER V. 

The Etymology of the word Heresy considered — and its 
JVature investigated. 

“ Heresy,” ‘A£pm$, as St. Jerom among others, 
observes, “ is so called from a Greek term signifying 
choice ; because each chooses for himself, forsooth, 
the doctrine he thinks best.” 2 But as it is not compe- 
tent to man to retain or reject what he pleases of re- 
ligious system of Christian Faith — which is a thing 
not recommended and handed down to him by human 
caprice, but upon Divine authority — therefore, heresy 
has been in all ages held to be deeply criminal, as is 
evident from the practice of the church, and the works 
of ecclesiastical writers. “ Heresies,” says Tertullian, 
“ are so called from a Greek word that means choice , 
which each individual exercises either in instituting, 
or adopting them. And it is for this reason that the 
heretic is said to stand condemned even to himself ; 
because he chose for himself the very thing in which 
he is condemned. We are not allowed to introduce 
any thing of our own fancy, or to choose what others 
introduce from theirs. We have the Apostles of the 

J Epiph. Tom. 2, lib. 2. in Ancorato, contra sectam Meletii 68, 
&, lib. 3. tom. 1, contra scctam Audianorum, 70. 
a Hieron. lib. 3, Comment, in Epist. ad Galat- cap. 5. 


32 


white’s confutation 


Lord for authorities on this head, who suggested no- 
thing of their own invention ; but faithfully delivered 
to the world the doctrine received from Christ. And 
hence, ‘ Though an angel from heaven were to preach 
otherwise, he should be pronounced anathema by us.’ 

With regard to the nature of heresy, it is to be ob- 
served, in the first place, that, in order to constitute it, 
an error of the understanding respecting some dogma 
of faith is required. For the Catholic Doctors, both 
ancient and modern, understand and define heresy to 
be an error respecting matters of faith, as is evident 
to those who read their writings. 

Secondly, a profession of Christianity is required on 
the part of the person in error : for he who renounces 
the Christian name, is to be called an apostate, not a 
heretic — “ who,” as St. Augustin saith, “ under the 
cloak of the Christian denomination, resisteth the doc- 
trine of Christ .” 1 2 F alse apostles transform themselves 
into the Apostles of Christ ; 3 and false prophets, of 
whom Christians ought to beware , 4 because they de- 
sire to appear sheep, therefore do they come in sheep’s 
clothing. “ For they could not,” says St. Leo the 
First, “deceive the true and unsuspecting sheep, unless 
they concealed their savage fury under the name of 
Christ .” 5 

Thirdly, obstinacy in error is required on the part 
of the person erring. “ For,” says St. Augustin, 
“ heresies and certain pernicious doctrines ensnaring 
souls, and precipitating them into the pit, have origi- 
nated only when the Holy Scriptures are not rightly 
understood, and when rash and audacious assertion 


1 Tertul. lib. de Praescriptionib. adversus haereticos, cap. 6. 

‘ A roan that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition 
avoid.’ Titus iii. 10. 

2 August, tom. 3, de civit. Dei, lib. 18, cap. 51. Vide etiam 
August, tom. 3, Enchir. ad Laurent, c. 5, et tom. 8, Ennarrat. in 

Psal. 8. 

a 2 Cor. xi. 13. 4 Mat. vii. 15. 

5 Leo Papa, ser. 5, de jejun. decimi mensis. 


OF CHU11CH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


33 


is made of that which is not rightly understood in 
them .” 1 Now, whatever is maintained contrary to 
the sufficiently declared sentiment of the Church, is 
asserted audaciously and with obstinacy of error. 
But no man is to be accounted a heretic, until he be 
informed of what the church teaches on the point 
whereon he is in error, and choose rather to resist 
her authority, than abandon his own opinion . 2 For 
as God ordinarily speaks to man only through the 
church, and through her declares his will on matters 
of faith ; 3 he who prefers resisting the declaration of 
the church which expresses the will of God condemn- 
ing his error, to renouncing the error of his own 
choice, is, without doubt, deservedly pronounced ob- 
stinate: and such error constitutes a species of in- 
fidelity. 

From what has preceded, the following definition 
of heresy may be collected : Heresy is the obstinate 
en'or of a man professing himself to be a Christian^ 
and an error contrary to a dogma of faith. 


CHAPTER VI. 

Whether Schismatics and Heretics be in the Catholic 
Church ? 

Since schism and heresies exclude from the king- 
dom of God , 4 it is certain that schismatics and here- 
tics have no vital union with the church of Christ, 
which is his mystical body, and of which he is the 
Saviour . 5 That this union is utterly destroyed by 
either schism or heresy is the doctrine of the Catholic 
church — which its doctors have constantly and una- 
nimously taught, and which they likewise teach at the 

l August, tom. 9, Epos. Evan. Joannis, Tract. 18. 

a August, tom. 7, lib. 4, de Baptis. contra Donatist. cap. 16. 

s Isaias ii. 2, &c. and 1 Tim. iii. 15. 

« Galat. v. 20, 21. 8 Ephes. v. 23. 


34 


white’s confutation 


present day. “ Let heretics and schismatics,” says 
St. Augustin, “ arrogate to themselves what they will, 
the charity which covereth a multitude of sins, is the 
peculiar gift of Catholic unity and peace ; and it exists 
not in all, for all are not of the Church, as we shall 
see in its proper place. Out of the pale of the church 
there cannot be that charity, without which the other 
virtues, though they may be recognized and approv- 
ed, yet cannot avail and liberate.” 1 Again, the same 
Augustin says, “ Therefore, the Catholic church only 
is the body of Christ, of which he is the Head — the 
Saviour of his own body. Outside this body, the 
Holy Ghost quickeneth no one; because, as the 
Apostle Paul saith — ‘ The charity of God is diffused 
in our hearts through the Holy Ghost, which is given 
to us.’ But he is not a partaker of the Divine charity, 
who is the enemy of unity. Therefore, they who are 
out of the Church, have not the Holy Ghost : for of 
them it is written, Jude v. 19 — ‘ These are they who 
separate themselves, sensual men, having not the 
Spirit.” 2 St. Gregory the Great also teaches to the 
same purport. Here are his words : “ This is the 
body outside which the Spirit doth not quicken. — 
Wherefore the blessed Augustin says — ‘ If you wish 
to live of the spirit of Christ, be within the body of 
Christ.’ The heretic does not live of this spirit, the 
schismatic does not, the excommunicated person does 
not live of it : for these are not of the body. But 
the church hath the quickening spirit, because she 
inseparably adheres to her Head — Christ. For it is 
written — he who adhereth to the Lord, is one spirit 
with him.” 3 

Schismatics and heretics may, nevertheless, be said 
in some measure to belong to the church. For they 
are capable of receiving the sacraments ; they have 
the baptismal character ; they can be punished by the 

1 Aug. tom. 7, lib. 3, de Baptis. contra Donat, cap. 16. 

2 Aug. tom. 2, Epist. 50, Bonifacio viro militari. Vide tom. 9. 
Expos, in Joan. 2 Evangel. Tract. 37. 

3 Greg, in Psal. 5. pceniten. in principio. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 35 

the baptismal character ; they can be punished by the 
church ; they are not altogether cut off ; and there- 
fore they are said to belong to the church in a certain 
sense — as the Catholic Doctors acknowledge. “ For 
that which is split,” saith St. Optatus of Milevis, “ is 
but partially divided, not entirely cut oft'. And de- 
servedly so, because you and we have the same eccle- 
siastical fellowship; and if men’s minds are at variance, 
thj3 sacraments are not. In a word, we can say to 
each other, that we believe the same things — are 
stamped with the same seal — have received the same 
baptism, and have been ordained after the same man- 
ner. That we read the Divine Testament and suppli- 
cate the same God. The Lord’s Prayer is the same 
with you as it is w r ith us ; but a split, as mentioned 
above, having taken place, it becomes necessary that 
the rent parts, hanging hither and thither, should be 
reunited.” 1 

“ And when the Apostle Paul,” observes St. Augus- 
tin, “ speaking of certain individuals who erred re- 
specting the truth, whose discourse spread like a cancer, 
and who subverted the faith of others, warns us that 
they should be avoided, he signifieth, nevertheless, 
that they belong to the one great house — but as vessels 
unto dishonour. I believe his reason for saying this 
was, that they had not as yet gone out ; or if they had 
gone out, how doth he say that they dwell in the same 
great house with the vessels of honour ? Unless, per- 
haps, by reason of the sacraments, which, even in the 
separated conventicles of heretics, remained unaltered ; 
and he saith that they belonged to the one great house, 
but with different merits — some unto honour, others 
unto dishonour.” 2 

If the question be now raised as to whether schisma- 
tics and heretics can be said to be in the church 


1 Optat. Milcv. de schism. Donat, adversus Parmenianum, lib. 
3, versus finem. 

2 Aug. tom. 7 de Bap. contra Donat, lib. 3, c. 19. Vide etiam lib. 
1, de Bapt. contra Donat, c. 10. 


36 


white’s confutation 


as they are said to belong to it? I answer in 
the affirmative, provided the question be understood 
of hidden and occult schismatics and heretics. The 
reason is : because they, on account of their external 
profession of obedience to Christ and the church, and 
their external communion of faith and sacraments with 
the church, though in reality but chaff, still remain in 
the granary of the Lord, in the common heap with the 
sound grain . 1 And although they be in reality bad 
fishes, yet they are comprised’ in the same net with 
the good ones . 2 

But if the question be extended to the case of open 
and avowed schismatics and heretics — I answer: such 
cannot, properly speaking, be said to be in the church. 
For, having been sifted on the winnowing sheet of 
the church, or exposed to the gust of temptation, they, 
being light as chaff, instantly flew out of doors ; or 
like the bad fishes (mentioned in the Gospel), slipping 
through the broken net, they swam beyond its reach 
— and therefore such cannot now be said to be within 
the granary of the Lord in the common heap with 
the wheat, or within the compass of the Lord’s net in 
common with the good fishes. Wherefore, St. John 
the Apostle, speaking in his first epistle of avowed 
heretics and schismatics, whom he therein calls Anti- 
christs, saith : ‘ They went out from us’ (in the Greek, 
E| yfiav e^eov,), but they were not of us. For if 
they had been of us, they would no doubt have re- 
mained with us: but that they may be manifest 
that they are not all of us .’ 3 From these words St. 
Augustin infers, that hidden heretics and schismatics 
are in the church ; but that the open and avowed are 
out of the church. “ Behold,” saith he, “ the Anti- 
christs. They went out from us : do we therefore 
bewail the loss ? Listen to the consolation — ‘ But 
they were not of us.’ All heretics, all schismatics 
went out from us, that means, they quitted the church : 
but they would not have gone out if they had been of 


i Matt. iii. 12. 


2 Mat. xiii. 47. 


3 1 John ii. 19. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 37 

us — before they went out, therefore, they were not of 
us. If before they went out they were not of us, there 
are many still within, who have not gone out, and who, 
nevertheless, are antichrists. Dare we affirm this? 
Why not ? Unless every person whilst within is not 
an antichrist.” A little further on he adds : “ And 
they who are within, are no doubt in the body of our 
Lord Jesus Christ ; since his body is as yet under- 
going the process of preservation, and will not be 
perfectly sound until the general resurrection. They 
are in the body of Christ like bad humours. When 
they are vomited forth, then the body experienceth 
relief ; and in like manner when the wicked go out 
from her, then is the church relieved. When the 
body vomits and casts them forth, it says : 4 those hu- 
mours have gone out from me, but they were not of 
me.’ What means, they were not of me ? That they 
were not cut out of my flesh ; but that, while within, 
they oppressed my breast. They went out from us, 
but be not sad, they were not of us. How do you 
prove this ? ‘ For if they had been of us, they would 

no doubt have remained with us.’ Hence you per- 
ceive that many who are not of us, receive the sacra- 
ments with us, receive baptism with us, receive with 
us that which the faithful know they receive, benedic- 
tion, eucharist, and whatsoever there is in the Holy 
Sacraments. They receive with us the very commu- 
nion of the Altar itself — and they are not ot us. Trial 
proves that they are not of us — when temptation pre- 
sents itself to them, they fly off as chaff before the 
wind, because they are not grain. But they will all 
fly off at that time — a thing which should often be 
repeated — when the granary of the Lord shall be win- 
nowed on the day of judgment. They went out from 
us, but they were not of us : ‘ for if they had been of 
us, they would no doubt have remained with us.’ Do 
you wish to know, dearest brethren, how it can be 
affirmed with the utmost certainty, that they who ac- 
cidentally went out, and return, are not antichrists, 
4 


38 


white’s confutation 


are not contrary to Christ ? They who are not anti- 
christs cannot possibly be induced to remain out of 
the church. But every man is of his own will either 
an antichrist, or he is in Christ : we are either in the 
members or in the bad humours. The man who 
amends his life, becomes a member in the body ; but 
he who continues in perversity, is one of the bad hu- 
mours — and when they went out, they who were op- 
pressed, felt themselves relieved.” And immediately 
after, on explaining these words of 1 John ii. 19,— 
‘ But that they may be made manifest, that they were 
not of us,’ he subjoins : “ For this reason Saint John 
added, ‘ that they may be made manifest,’ because 
even when they are within, they are not of us. Yet 
they are not manifest ; but by going out, they become 
manifest.” 1 

We shall conclude this chapter with the words of 
St. Augustin, writing in another work against the 
schismatic Donatists. “ Our Fathers,” saith he, “ in- 
fluenced by these and similar considerations, pot only 
before the time of Cyprian and Agrippa, but after- 
wards, too, held the very salutary custom of approv- 
ing rather than rejecting whatever they found purely 
divine and legitimate in any heresy or schism ; but 
whatsoever they found pernicious and peculiar to 
heresy or schism, that they earnestly denounced and 
wholesomely corrected.” 2 


CHAPTER VII. 

The course pursued by Heretics and Schismatics is 
exposed , in oD'der that they themselves be avoided. 

Since inveterate schism, as we have already said, is 
joined with heresy, the ancients speak almost indiscri- 
minately of the morals of schismatics and heretics. 


1 Aug. tom. 9. Expos, in 1. Epist. Joan. Tract. 3. 
3 Aug. tom. 7, de Bap. contra Donat, lib. 3, c. 19. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


39 


Of' the many things which they have observed on at 
great length respecting their morals, we for the sake 
of brevity, shall only mention a few. 

In the first place, schismatics and heretics rend the 
church of Christ, and effect the ruin of the upright. 
With this Tertullian charges them : “ But touching 
their exposition of God’s Holy Word, what shall I 
say ; since their chief concern is, not to convert hea- 
thens but to pervert Catholics ? The grand aim of 
their ambition is to cast down those who stand, not to 
raise up those who are down ; for even the work they 
have cometh not of their own building, but from the 
pulling down of the edifice of truth. They undermine 
our edifices, that they may build up their own.” 1 See 
Acts xx. 30 ; and 2 Peter ii. 1, 2, 3, &c. 

Secondly, St. Vincent of Liris observes that they are 
remarkable for their excessive boasting and vanity. 
“ You may,” he says, “hear some of them exclaiming: 
* Come, O ye foolish and wretched creatures, who are 
commonly called Catholics, and learn the true faith, 
which none but we understand. It lay hid for many 
ages back, but has been recently revealed and brought 
to light.”* 2 See 3 Kings xxii. and 2 Peter ii. 13, 19. 

1 Tertul. de Prescript, adversus Hsereticos. c. 42. Vide Origen in 
Ezech. homil. 1. 

* That these expressions of Vincent are not unjustly imputed to 
the sectaries, numerous are the proofs which every day affords. For 
they speak as disparagingly of Catholics now as they did in the 
time of Vincent. Luther also asserts, and many of his followers are 
to be heard repeating the absurd assertion — that for many ages back 
(a multis ante seeculis) there was not one Christian who either preach, 
ed or understood the true doctrine of faith. What Luther cunningly 
left undefined by the term “many ages back,” the Church of England 
undertakes to explain by “eight hundred years — and more!!” Is it 
not remarkably strange, that they who rail against Catholics in the 
present age, apply to them the very same terms as were used by the 
heetics in St. Vincent’s time, though fourteen hundred years have 
rolled by since that great and learned man wrote the above words. 

N.B. — The notes marked with the asterisk (*) do not belong to the 
original work. 

2 Vincent. Lirinen. lib. adversus profanas htereticorum novitates 
c. 26. 


40 


white’s confutation 


Thirdly, St. Optatus of Milevis observes that they 
are remarkable for their intemperance, and that their 
disciples are still more so. He says to them — “Now, 
though I were to be silent regarding yourselves, who 
can be so respecting those whom you have succeeded 
in seducing either by faction or subtilty, to join your 
party ? Not only men but women too, have suddenly 
changed from sheep into foxes, from being faithful, 
they have all at once become perfidious, from patient 
furious, from pacific litigious, from upright, seducers, 
from modest shameless, from mild fierce, from inno- 
cent they have become artificers of wickedness.” 1 — 
See the 3d Epistle of John, 9th & 10th verses ; and 
Jude v. 8. 

Fourthly, St. Hilary of Pictavi remarks that they 
are to be known by their dissensions, and perpetual 
quarrels among themselves. Here are his words — 
“ For, whereas the church founded by the Lord, and 
established by his Apostles, is that alone from which 
every raging heresy, however diversified its peculiar 
impieties, has cut itself off ; and whereas it cannot be 
denied, that all. diversity of faith had its origin in false 
glossing of the Scriptures, whilst the text is tortured 
to suit the understanding, rather than the understand- 
ing disciplined to adapt itself to the text : neverthe- 
less, whilst the opposing parties are at war with each 
other, the true church may be distinguished, not only 
by her own doctrine, but also by the conflicting doc- 
trines of her adversaries — so that whilst all are united 
in opposition to her alone, she by the very fact of 
continuing alone and indivisible, confutes the impious 
errors of them all. Wherefore, all heretics are agreed 
in this, that they conspire against the church; but 
whilst they mutually conquer each other, they obtain 
no conquest for themselves. For the victory of each 
of them over the other, is of all things the triumph 
heresy, that which the one reprobates in the other, 


1 Optat. Milev. dc schis. Donat, advcrsus Parmenianum, lib. 6. 
prope finem. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


41 


the faith of the church hath already condemned. 
There is, indeed, no one thing common to heretics ; 
and, consequently, their intestine broils only serve to 
confirm our faith.” 1 See Acts xxiii. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , and 
1 Corinthians iii. 3 , 4 . 

Fifthly, St. Augustin observes, that they are re- 
markable for their calumnies. “ Heretics,” says this 
holy father, “ have calumnies of their own, and each 
particular heresy hath its peculiar ones. Schismatics 
also have theirs, every one of whom is cut off by his 
pride from communion with the members of Christ.” 2 
See Numbers xvi. 3 , 13 , 14 ; and 2 Corinthians x. 10 . 

Lastly, St. Leo the Great paints them as fraudu- 
lently cunning. Here are his words: “You may 
know them by their creeping humility, their taking 
and insinuating address, their soft but enslaving flat- 
teries, and their pious assassination of souls. For 
they come as our Saviour hath foretold, in sheep’s 
clothing, but within they are ravening w r olves. The 
reason they so come is, because they could not deceive 
the true and unsuspecting sheep, unless they concealed 
their savage fury under the attractive garb of Christi- 
anity.” 3 See Matthew vii. 15 , & 2 Cor. xi. 13 , 14 . 

From what has been now said, it is quite clear, that 
both for our own safeguard and that of others, here- 
tics and schismatics should be carefully avoided. 
Weak-minded Catholics, whose number is very great, 
expose themselves to the danger of seduction by con- 
versing with them ; and in proportion to their mental 
infirmity, do the dangers of perversion increase. — 
Wherefore, if they wish to avoid such dangers, let 
them diligently attend to the Word of God, which 
strictly cautions to guard against them.* Pious and 


1 Hilarius de Trinitate, lib. 7, non longe a principio. 

2 Aug. tom. 8, in Psal. 118. Concio. 26. 

8 Leo Papa, de jejunio decimi mensis. serin. 5. 

* * Beware of false prophets/ who/ saith our Divine Redeemer 
himself, ‘come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they 

4 * 


42 


white’s confutation 


steadfast Catholics are, it is true, in a state of compa- 
rative security; but still they have reason to be on 
their guard, lest, by frequent and incautious inter- 
course with heretics, they should be an occasion of 
scandal to their less firm brethren. 

But all these perils being out of the question, when- 
ever an opportunity offers, or when there gleameth a 
hope of restoring heretics and schismatics to the fold 
of Christ, the firm and solidly-instructed Catholics, 
especially the pastors of the church, should seriously 
devote themselves to this important work, and imitate 
the Good Shepherd who laid down his life for his 
flock — who sought the one sheep wandering on the 
mountains, and having found it, lifted it upon the 
same shoulders which bore the wood of the cross, and 
having so borne it, restored it to the one fold. This 
principle, however, is not applicable to the founders 
of heresies, although it may be adopted with regard 
to their followers. The cases that occur on this head 
are various and multiplied. But every prudent person 
will try each and singular case according to the stand- 
ard of the Divine Word, agreeably to the tradition of 
the Catholic church, the dictates of conscience and 
right reason ; and, after such scrutiny, will pursue the 
line of conduct his judgment shall chalk out. 


CHAPTER VIII. 

The Reason which induced the Author to embrace the 
Catholic Faith. 

In the preceding Chapters I have exposed the enor- 
mous evil of schism and heresy, and shown with what 

are ravening wolves.’ Mat. vii. 15. ‘Now I beseech you, brethren, 
to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the 
doctrine you have learned, and to avoid them. For they that are 
such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly ; and by pleas- 
ing speeches, and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent.’ 
Romans xvi. 17, 18. 


OF CHUROH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 43 

caution sectaries are to be avoided. I have also told 
you, that, when I discovered, after long research, and 
by means of the grace of God, that the church of Eng- 
land, with which I once held communion, and in which 
I publicly officiated, was founded in schism and 
heresy — lest I should be guilty of ingratitude to God 
for so great a gift of his grace, and in order to consult 
for the salvation of my soul — I quitted its communion 
and betook myself to the Roman Catholic and Apos- 
tolic church ; that to her I humbly submitted myself 
in all she required, for (as I was conscientiously per- 
suaded) she required nothing inconsistent with the 
right of a pious mother, or the duty of an obedient 
son : and that I was, by the grace of God, and the 
indulgence of this pious mother, admitted to her com- 
munion, in which I now live, and in which with God’s 
grace I shall always persevere. 

The above persuasion that arose in my mind, was 
not the effect of levity or rashness ; but was produced 
by certain reasonings deduced from the Catholic 
church. That I have carefully read this doctrine, 
and collated it with that of the church of England, 
will appear in the course of the present Treatise. 

I now enter on my undertaking, and in the first 
place affirm that — The Church of England is founded 
in schism and heresy : it is, therefore, to he avoided by 
every prudent Christian. The reason of the antece- 
dent is, that the doctrine on which the church of Eng- 
land is founded, is schismatic and heretical — the con- 
sequence (that it should be avoided by every prudent 
Christian) is self-evident. But in order to prove this 
proposition, I shall demonstrate what the doctrine of 
the Church of England is. Then, by a comparison 
instituted between it and the Catholic doctrine, I 
shall, with the assistance of God, prove that the latter 
is the doctrine of the Roman church ; but that the for- 
mer is schismatic and heretical — and, therefore, con- 
trary to the true Catholic doctrine. Thus, candid 


44 


white’s confutation 


reader, you have now before you the whole sub- 
stance and plan of the present Treatise. 


CHAPTER IX. 


The Doctrine on which the Church of England is 
founded. 

A small book, containing thirty-nine articles, com- 
prises the doctrine of the church of England, as 
may be seen in the “ Ratification” of that little book, 
which ratification, published A. D. 1571, is contained 
after the articles, and given at greater length in the 
King’s Declaration, published A. D. 1642. The De- 
claration is partly as follows : “ The Articles of the 
Chnrrh of ‘RmrlanH. formerly approved and confirmed 



which our clergy have 


universally subscribed, embrace the true doctrine of 
the church of England, congruent with the Word of 
God, which Articles, therefore, we confirm, and we 
require that all our beloved subjects persevere in the 
uniform profession of them ; and we prohibit all, even 
the smallest possible departure from them : We also 
command, that, unto the attaining of the same end, a 
fresh impression of them be executed, and that they 
be published with this our Declaration.” 

These articles are of two kinds. Some of them 
contain the same doctrine as that taught in the Catho- 
lic church. English Protestants are not culpable for 
holding this portion ; but because they detain the truth 
of Christ in the injustice of schism and human error , 1 
they are therefore to be condemned. They as yet re- 
tain the truth in many things, they hold some things 
that are good and praiseworthy ; but on account of 
their schism and heresy, they possess these things 
without profit or advantage. 

Concerning such like persons, St. Augustin teaches 


i Romans i. 18. 


OF CHUltCH-OF-ENGLANDISM 


45 


in the following words : “ In many things, they were 
with me. We both held baptism — in that they were 
with me. We both read the Gospel — in that they were 
with me. We kept the feasts of the martyrs — in that 
they were with me. We observed the Paschal solem- 
nity — in that they were with me ; but they were not 
entirely with me. In their schism, they were not with 
me ; in their heresy, they were not with me. In many 
things they were with me, in some things they were 
not with me. But because of the few things in which 
they are not with me, the many in which they are, 
avail them not. ‘And if I should have prophecy/ 
saith the Apostle Paul , 1 ‘ and should know all mys- 
teries, and all knowledge; and if I should have 
all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have 
not charity, I am nothing,’ &c . 2 “ He did not say,” 

observes St. Augustin, “ all these things are nothing ; 
but, if I have not charity, I am nothing. For who 
would be mad enough to say, the sacraments of God 
are nothing ? Who to say, prophecy is nothing, faith 
is nothing ? These things are not nothing ; but though 
these things be great, I, holding these great things, 
am nothing, if I have not charity. These things are 
great, and I have them, yet I am nothing, if I have not 
charity, through which these things that are great 
can be profitable to me. For if I be void of charity, 
though these things I may possess, yet they cannot 
avail me.” And a few lines after, he says : “ Out of 
the Catholic church, a man may have every thing — 
but eternal salvation . He may have honour, — he may 
approach the Sacrament — may sing hallelujahs — 
may answer amen — may believe the Gospel — may 
hold and preach the faith in the name of the Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : but nowhere, 
save within the Catholic church, can he attain salva- 
tion .” 3 For whosoever hath not charity, is out of her 

1 1 Cor. xiii. 2, &c. 2 Aug. tom. 8. Ennarat. in Psal. 54. 

3 Aug. tom. 7. Serm. super gestis cum Emerito Donatistarum Epis- 
copo. Vide etiam Aug. lib. 1 , c. 29, contra Cresconium Grammat. 


46 white’s confutation 

pale ; and no one can have charity, who does not ad- 
here to unity. 

But many other articles of the Thirty-Nine embrace 
doctrine, which is peculiarly that of the church of 
England, and which renders her wholly distinct from 
the Catholic church. For if these articles be tried 
by the strict rule of Catholic doctrine, some will be 
found heretical, and condemned by the primitive fa- 
thers; some erroneous; some scandalous; some offen- 
sive to pious ears; and others to be rejected as rash and 
suspicious. Wherefore, they fall under the same cen- 
sure as that pronounced by the council of Constance, 
under similar circumstances, against the articles of 
the Arch-heretic, John Wicldeff . 1 

And that many of them are of this character, will be 
evident from our examination of them which is the 
primary object of the present work. It is our inten- 
tion to examine them according to the doctrine of 
the Catholic church, in the same order as they follow 
in the Book of Common Prayer, except the thirty- 
seventh, with which we begin ; because that article 
appears to us to contain, as it were, the rock on 
which the church of England was wrecked. 


CHAPTER X. 

The Thirty-Seventh Article of the Church of England 
examined. 

The whole doctrine of this Article, which we are 
now about to examine, may be reduced to three propo- 
sitions. The first of these is contained in the following 
words, The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in 
this realm of England' Second — Ecclesiastical causes 
appertain to the jurisdiction of those who hold the Royal 


i Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Constan. sess. 8, damnatur 45 arti- 
culi. Joannis WiclefF. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENCLANDI3M. 


47 


power of this kingdom . Third — This realm is not , nor 
ought to he, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. The 
first of these propositions is contained in the express 
terms of the Article itself. The second and third are 
necessarily deducible from its words, which be these 
— “ The Queen’s Majesty hath the chief power in this 
realm of England, and other her dominions, unto 
whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, 
whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes 
doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to 
any foreign jurisdiction.” 

The moment the first of these propositions is com- 
pared with the doctrine of the Catholic Church, its 
direct opposition to that doctrine becomes glaringly 
apparent. For she constantly teaches, and has always 
taught by her pastors and doctors, these three things. 
Firstly — That Peter ivas Chief Pastor of the Church 
by Divine appointment, and Christ's Vicar upon earth . 
Secondly — That he received this office for himself and 
his successors. Thirdly — That the Bishops of Rome 
are his successors in this office. If we substantiate all 
these statements by clear and indisputable testimonies, 
as with the assistance of God’s grace we intend to do 
in the succeeding chapters : it will then be evident in 
how great dangers they are involved, who not only 
deny the obedience due to the Chief Pastor, but also 
respecting this obedience, hold, as an article of their 
religion, an error directly opposed to the doctrine of 
the Catholic Church. 


CHAPTER XI. 

The doctrine contained in the latter paragraph of the 
preceding Chapter is confirmed by the testimonies 
of Catholics of the Latin Church. 

We quote, first, St. Bernard, renowned for his mira- 
cles, and who, even according to the testimony of his 
adversaries, was a holy man, and so far from being 


48 


white’s confutation 


the flatterer, was the severe monitor, of the Bishop of 
Rome. This will be evident to whoever reads his 
works “ On Consideration,” addressed to Pope Eu- 
gene. In the eighth chapter of his second book “ On 
Consideration,” he writes thus to Eugene : “ Thou 
art he to whom the keys were delivered, to whom the 
sheep were entrusted. There are, it is true, other 
gatekeepers, and other pastors of flocks ; but as thou 
hast inherited both names differently, in the same 
degree hast thou inherited them more gloriously than 
they. They have their flocks assigned to them, each 
a separate one ; but to thee all are entrusted — the 
one flock to the one shepherd. Thou art the one 
Pastor not of the sheep only, but of the shepherds 
also. Do you inquire whence I prove this ? From 
the Word of the Lord. For to which, I ask, not only 
of the bishops, but even of the Apostles, were the en- 
tire of the sheep thus absolutely and indiscriminately 
committed ? ‘ If thou lovest me, Peter, feed my 

sheep.’ What sheep? The people of this or that 
particular state, region, or kingdom? My sheep, 
saith the Lord. To whom then is it not evident that 
he did not specify a portion , but assigned the whole ? 
There is no exception, where there is no distinction.” 
And immediately after, he adds: “In short, James, 
who might have been regarded as the pillar of the 
Church, contented himself with Jerusalem alone, there- 
by acknowledging Peter the universal head. And he 
was appropriately located , in that city to raise up seed 
for his departed Brother, who had there suffered cru- 
cifixion — for he (James) was called the brother of our 
Lord. Now the brother of our Lord having relin- 
quished all pretension, who besides should dare lay 
claim to the prerogative of Peter ? Hence, according 
to your canons, others are called to a portion of the 
solicitude, you only to the plenitude of power. The 
power of the rest is circumscribed, but thine extends 
even to those who have received jurisdiction over 
others. Hast thou not, if just cause existed, power 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


49 


to shut heaven against a bishop, to degrade him from 
his episcopacy, and hand him over to Satan P Thy 
jurisdictional prerogative, therefore, remains unshaken 
and indisputable, both as regards the exercising of 
the keys delivered to thee, and the government of the 
sheep committed to thy care.” 1 

The same St. Bernard in his 190th Epistle to Pope 
Innocent, says, — “ It is right that all dangers and 
scandals occurring in the kingdom of God should be 
referred to your apostolical authority — especially such 
as affect the faith. For I think it most fitting that all 
breaches of doctrine should be there repaired where 
the faith cannot suffer defect. And such, assuredly, 
is the prerogative of this See. For to whom other 
did Christ at any time say: ‘ I have prayed for thee, 
Peter, that thy faith fail not V Now mark the words 
which follow as a consequence — ‘ and thou being 
once converted, confirm thy brethren.’ 2 This is, in- 
deed, necessary to be done at present. The time has 
arrived, most beloved father, for you to manifest your 
sovereignty, evince your zeal, and do honour to your 
ministry. And you will fully discharge the place of 
Peter, whose very see you now occupy, if, by your 
admonition you confirm the hearts of the wavering, 


* St. Bernard here alludes to the solemn delivery of the keys to 
Peter by his Master, Jesus Christ, Mat. xvi. 19. He to whom is given 
full power of the keys, can shut or open ; but yet with a responsibili- 
ty so perilous, as to ensure the exercise of a sound discretion on his 
part, and to secure justice and liberty to others. By shutting hea- 
ven against a bishop, and handing him over to Satan, St. Bernard 
means no more than the power of spiritual excommunication in the 
same sense as was intended by St. Paul, in reference to the incestu- 
ous Corinthian. 1 Cor. v. 4, 5. It may not be amiss to observe 
here for the satisfaction of Protestants, that Luther pronounced Ber- 
nard to be the greatest saint on the calendar since the days of the 
Apostles — and possibly this may be the reason why our author 
quotes the authority of so recent, although so distinguished a witness. 

1 Bernar. lib. 2, c. 8. De Consideratione ad Eugenium Papam. 
Vide etiam Bernardi cpist. 256, ad Eugenium Papam. 

2 Luke xxii. 32. 


50 White’s confutation 

and by your authority crush the corruptors of the 
Faith.” 1 

St. Jerom also, in his Epistle to Pope Damasus, 
writes as follows : “ As the East, seized with its in- 
veterate religious mania, and distracted by internal 
dissensions, tears into shreds the seamless garment 
of Christ, woven from the top throughout ; and as 
foxes so prey upon the vineyard of the Lord, that 
amidst the broken cisterns which hold no water, it is 
difficult to trace out the fountain sealed up and the 
garden enclosed : 2 I have, therefore, resolved to con- 
sult the chair of Peter, and the faith lauded by the 
mouth of the Apostle — and now to demand food for 
my soul from that source whence 1 have already re- 
ceived the vestments of Christ. Neither could the 
immense expanse of the ocean and the distance of the 
interjacent land, keep me from inspecting the precious 
pearl. ‘ Wheresoever the body shall be, thither will 
the eagles also be gathered together.’ 3 The patrimony 
being dissipated by a wicked offspring, the hereditary 
estate of our fathers is preserved inviolate by you 
alone. Where you are, the fruitful soil produceth 
the pure seed of the Lord an hundred-fold. Where 
we are, the corn buried in furrows degenerates into 
cockle and reed. Now the sun of justice arises in 
the West; but in the East, that Lucifer, who hath 
fallen, has set his throne above the stars: ‘You are 
the light of the world — you are the salt of the earth.’ 4 
You are the vessels of gold and silver; with us are 
but vessels of earth and wood, which await the iron 
rod and everlasting fire. 5 Therefore, though your 
greatness awe me, your humanity invites me. From 
the priest, I demand the victim of salvation ; from the 
Pastor, the protection of the sheep. Let envious 
distinction vanish, let the pride of Roman dignity 

1 Bernardi epist. 190 ad Innocen. Papam. 

2 Cantic. iv. 12. 3 Luke xvii. 37. 

4 Matt. v. 13, 14. s 2 Tim. ii. 20. 


OF CHURCH-OF-EN GLANDISM. 


51 


disappear — I speak with the successor of the fisherman 
and the disciple of the cross. Seeking Christ before 
all things, I am associated in communion with your 
Holiness, that is, with the chair of Peter — upon which 
rock I know the Church is built. Whosoever eateth 
the lamb out of this house, is a profane man. — Who- 
soever is not within the Ark of Noah, shall perish 
midst the deluge.” A little further on, St. Jerom 
again says: “ I do not know Vitalis, I reject Miletius, 
I am ignorant of Paulinus. Whosoever gathereth 
not with thee, scattereth — that is, he who is not of 
Christ, is of antichrist.” And in the end of the same 
epistle he says : “ Wherefore, I beseech your holiness, 
through the crucified Saviour of the world, and the 
consubstantial Trinity, to direct and authorize me, 
either to be silent on, or to preach the doctrine of the 
Hypostases .” 1 See his following epistle to Pope Da- 
masus, on the same subject. 

St. Optatus of Milevis writes in the following strain 
to Parmenianus, on the schism of the Donatists — “You 
cannot deny, that you know the episcopal chair was 
first established in the city of Rome by Peter ; that 
in it he sat as head of all the Apostles — whence he 
was also called Cephas ; 2 that by means of this one 
chair unity was to be preserved amongst all : so that 
he would now be a schismatic and a sinner, who would 
set up any other chair in opposition to the chair of 
unity. Peter, therefore, was the first who sat in the 
chair of unity, which is the highest of honours. To 
him succeeded Linus,” &c. Then, after enumerating 
Peter’s successors in the chair, he concludes with 
these words — “ To Damasus succeeded Siricius, our 
associate and friend, who occupies it at the present 
day, with whom we and the entire world, correspond- 
ing by means of circular letters, are united in strict 
communion. Let you now, who would fain arrogate 


1 Hieron. epist. ad Damas. Papam de hypostasibus Arrian, 

a John i. 42. 


52 


white’s confutation 


to yourselves the holy church, prove the origin of 
your chair.” And a little further on, rebuking the 
chair of Victor of Garbia, he says : “ If Victor were 
required to state where he would establish his chair, 
he could neither point out a person that preceded him 
there, nor show any chair unless one of pestilence. 
And pestilence buries amongst the damned those who 
perish of its virulence. Hell is known to have its 
gates, against which the Scriptures tell us that Peter, 
who is our prince, received the keys of salvation, 
when Christ said to him : ‘ I will give to thee the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against them .’ 1 How comes it then, 
that you strive to usurp the keys of the kingdom — 
you who, by your presumption and audacity, sacri- 
legiously war against the chair of Peter .” 2 

St. Augustin, among other considerations wdiich he 
enumerates as keeping him in the bosom of the Catho- 
lic church, mentions the following : “ The succession 
of pastors from the chair of the Apostle Peter, to 
whom our Lord after his resurrection, committed the 
feeding of his flock, down to the present bishop, keeps 
me in it .” 3 And again the same St. Augustin, writing 
to Generosus, says : “ For if the order of episcopal 
succession be regarded, with how much more cer- 
tainty, and real security for salvation do we reckon 
from Peter, to whom, as representative of the entire 
church, our Lord said — ‘ Upon this rock I will build 
my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail 
against it .’ 4 For to Peter succeeded Linus, to Linus 
succeeded Cletus,” &c. Then, after enumerating the 
successors of Peter, he adds — “ In this order of suc- 
cession no Donatist. bishop is found.” And immedi- 

1 Mat. xvi. 19. 

2 Optatus de schismate Donatist, adversus Parmenianum, lib. 2. 

3 August, tom. 6, lib. contra epist. Manichcei, quam vocant Funda* 
menti, c. 4. 

4 Mat. xvi. 18. 


OF CHURCH-OF-EISGLANDISM. 


53 


ately after, he says, — “ But even if into this long line 
of Bishops, succeeding each other from Peter to Anas- 
tatius, who now occupies the Holy See, another Judas 
should contrive to creep, yet that would not prejudice 
the church or her conscientious children, to whom 
our Lord, (providing for such calamity) when speak- 
ing of wicked bishops, in the 23d chapter and 3d verse 
of Saint Matthew, saith: “ Whatsoever they command, 
observe* ; but what they do, observe not ; for they 
preach and practise not.’” * 1 

The same Augustin, writing to Innocent the First, 
on his own behalf, and in conjunction with the Fath- 
ers of the council of Carthage, says : “ Lord and holy 
brother, we have deemed it right to communicate this 
transaction to you, in order that we may have our 
weak decrees strengthened by the authority of the 
Apostolic see — for the purpose of ensuring the salva- 
tion of many, and correcting the wickedness of cer- 
tain individuals.” Immediately after he again writes 
— “ Although it seemed meet to your holiness, that 
Pelagius should be absolved after his misdeeds, which 
are said to be now terminated in the East ; yet his 
heresy, and the impiety that sprang from it, which 
have many daring supporters scattered far and wide, 
should be anajthematized by the authority of the Apos- 
tolic chair.” 2 And again, writing to Innocent the 
First, in conjunction with the Fathers of the council 
of Milevis, Augustin says — “ As our Lord by a gift of 
his special grace, hath placed you in the Apostolic 
chair, and bestowed on the present age one adorned 
with such qualities, that it would be criminal neglect 
on our part to conceal from your holiness whatever 
is necessary to be suggested for the church’s interest, 
as it would be impossible you could receive such in- 

* Augustin here, like St. Paul in many places throughout the Holy 
Scriptures, gives the substance of the text instead of the text it- 
self. 

1 Aug. tom* 2. epist. 165, ad Generosum. 

2 Aug. tom. 2. epist. DO, ad Innocentium Priraura Papam, 

5 * 


54 


white’s confutation 


formation fastidiously, or, having received it, that you 
could treat it with negligence, deign then, we beseech 
thee, to apply thy pastoral care to the great dangers 
of the infirm members of Christ. For a new heresy, 
a most dangerous tempest of the enemies of the grace 
of Christ, hath begun to rage,” &C . 1 

St. Cyprian, in his treatise on the unity of the 
church, beautifully explains the wiles of the Devil in 
the following words : — “ Did Satan on seeing his idols 
abandoned, and his seats and temples deserted by a 
people of too much belief, invent any new fraud 
whereby to deceive the unwary under the title of the 
Christian name? Yes: he invented heresies and 
schisms, whereby to subvert the faith, corrupt truth, 
and rend asunder unity. Those whom he cannot de- 
tain in the blindness of the old way, he encompasseth 
and misleadeth them in the mazes of a new path. 
He snatches men from the church, and while they 
imagine themselves to have now approached the light, 
and escaped the darkness of the world, he again spread- 
eth other darkness over their ignorant minds — in such 
a manner that they, not holding by the Gospel of 
Christ, and its observance, and law, may yet call 
themselves Christians; and though walking in dark- 
ness, may imagine they have light, owing to the blan- 
dishments and deception of the Adversary, who, to 
use the words of the Apostle, ‘ Transformed himself 
into an angel of light, and setteth forth his ministers 
as the ministers of justice .* 2 Thus they go on boldly 
imposing night for day, death for salvation, despair 
under the semblance of hope, perfidy under the pre- 
text of faith, antichrist under the name of Christ — in 
order that by propagating plausible falsehoods, they 
may frustrate truth, by subtilty. This is the case, 
most beloved brethren, so long as people do not return 
to the fountain of truth, or seek the head, or preserve 
the doctrine of our heavenly Master. Which things 


i Aug. tom. 2, epist. 92. 


3 2 Cor. xi. 14,15. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 55 

would each weigh and examine, there would be no 
need of long tracts and arguments. The proof of the 
right faith is easy by the compendious method of 
truth. Our Lord thus addresses Peter — •* I say to 
thee : that thou art Peter ; and upon this rock I will 
build my church, and the gates of hell shall not 
prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou 
shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven : 
and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be 
loosed also in heaven / 1 And again, after his resur- 
rection, our Lord saith to the same Peter : 4 Feed my 
sheep .’ 2 Upon him alone , he builds his church — to 
him he commits the feeding of his sheep. And 
although after his resurrection, our Lord bestows on 
all the Apostles an equal power, when he says : 4 As 
the Father hath sent me, I also send you. Receive ye 
the Holy Ghost: whose sins you shall forgive, they 
are forgiven them : and whose sins you shall retain, 
they are retained yet, in order to manifest unity, 
he established one chair , and ordained of his special 
authority, that the origin of its unity should spring 
from one possessor. The other Apostles, as well as 
Peter, were, it is true, endowed with an equal fellow- 
ship of dignity and power ; but the beginning proceeds 
from unity. The primacy is given to Peter — in order 
that the unity of the church and the chair of Christ 
should be manifest.” And immediately after, Cyprian 
adds : 44 Can he who doth not hold the unity of the 
church believe that he holdeth the faith ? He who 
opposeth and withstandeth the church, who forsaketh 
the CHAIR OF PETER, upon which the church is 
founded, can he trust that he is in the church ?” 3 

In his epistle to the people, respecting the five schis- 
matic priests of the faction of Felicissimus, the same 
St. Cyprian says : 44 God is one, and Christ is one, and 


1 Mat. xvi. 18, 19. 2 John xxi. 15, 16, 17, &c. 

a Cyprianus, Tract, de unitate Ecclesiap, Paulo post principium. 


56 


WHITE S CONFUTATION 


his church is one, and the CHAIR founded upon Peter 
by the word of our Lord, is one. To establish any 
other altar, or frame any other priesthood, besides the 
one altar and the one priesthood, is not possible. 
Whosoever gathereth elsewhere, sCattereth. What- 
soever is instituted by human frenzy, to the disarrange- 
ment of the divine harmony, is adulterous, impious, 
and sacrilegious.” 1 Wherefore, in another of his 
epistles, he calls the Roman church — “ the root and 
mother of the Catholic church.” 2 And in his 55th 
epistle to Pope Cornelius, he says : “ After these 

attempts, and moreover still, with their pseudo-bishops 
chosen by heretics, they have the audacity to sail, 
and carry, to the CHAIR OF PETER, and to the 
principal church, whence sacerdotal unity hath taken 
its rise, letters from schismatics and profane men; 
not reflecting, that they are the very Romans whose 
faith was lauded by the Apostle, 3 and to whom perfidy 
can have no access.” 4 


CHAPTER XII. 

The same Doctrine is confirmed by the testimonies of 
Catholics of the Greek Church . 

Writing on this subject, St. Irenseus, who is gene- 
rally classed among the Greek Fathers, says — “ But 
as it would be too tedious, in such a volume as the 
present, to enumerate the successions of all the 
Churches, I shall confine myself to that of Rome, the 
greatest, and most ancient, and the universally known 
Church, founded and established by the two glorious 
Apostles, Peter and Paul ; for by pointing to the tra- 

1 Cyprianus ad plebem de quinque presbyt. schismaticis factionis 
Felicissimi, epist. 40. 

2 Cyprianus ad Cornel. Papam, epist. 45. 

s Rom. i. 8, and xv. 14. 

4 Cyprianus ad Comelium Papam, epist. 55. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLAND1SM. 57 " 

dition which she hath from the Apostles, and the faith 
published to mankind, and which, through the succes- 
sion of her Bishops, reacheth even to us, we confound 
all those, who, through a mischievous self-complacen- 
cy, through vain glory, wilful blindness, or perverse- 
ness, draw conclusions and inculcate doctrines other 
than what, are right. For all other Churches, that is 
to say, the faithful of the whole world, must, on ac- 
count of her more powerful sovereignty, have recourse 
to this Church, in which the Apostolic doctrine has 
ever been faithfully preserved by her Pastors. The 
blessed Apostles, therefore, after founding and in- 
structing this Church, for the administration thereof, 
committed the episcopacy to Linus,” &c. Then, after 
enumerating the Bishops of the See of Rome, he adds 
— “ By means of this regular ordination and succes- 
sion, the Apostolic tradition which is in the Church, 
and the preaching of the truth, have reached even to 
us. And this shows most satisfactorily, that it is one 
and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved 
in the church from the days of the apostles to the pre- 
sent, and which is still handed down in truth .” 1 

St. Chrysostom, explaining these words of the scrip- 
ture — ‘ And I say to thee : That thou art Peter ; and 
upon this rock I will build my church / 2 writes as fol- 
lows : — “ Hereby our Lord openly foretold the great 
multitude of those, who were and are, and shall be- 
come believers ; he also elevates the mind of Peter 
to more sublime conceptions, whilst he at the same 
time constitutes him the pastor of his future church.” 
And a little after, the same .distinguished Father saith, 

“ You perceive how our Lord leads Peter to entertain 
a more exalted opinion of himself ; and how, by these 
two promises, he manifestly reveals Himself to be the 
Son of God. For things which God alone can grant, 
he promiseth, namely, the remission of sins — that his 
future Church should remain unmoved in the midst of 


1 Iren®us adversus hroreses, lib. 3. c. 3. 

2 .Mat. xvi. 18. 


58 


white’s confutation 


constant and terrific storms violently assailing her — 
and that the Pastor and head of this Church, an igno- 
ble fisherman, with the whole world opposed to him, 
should prove more firm than adamant : these things, 
I say, all which are in the power of God alone, He 
promiseth to grant .” 1 

Writing on the subject of the priesthood, the same 
Chrysostom saith : — “ F or why did not the great and 
good God spare his own, his only begotten Son, but 
surrender Him, whom alone he had ? Doubtless, his 
reason was, in order that He may reconcile to him 
those who should incur his displeasure, and also that 
He may render to him a choice and peculiar people. 
For what cause, likewise, did the Son shed his blood? 
Certainly, that he may gain those sheep, the care of 

WHICH HE COMMITTED TO PeTER AND HIS SUCCESSORS,” 

&c . 2 Again, in his Epistle to Pope Innocent, after 
explaining the injury done him by Theophilus, bishop 
of Alexandria, he adds — “ Wherefore, lest this con- 
fusion should invade every nation under heaven, I 
beseech thee to direct, that the things which have 
been so iniquitously done against me, in my absence, 
and though I shrank not from trial, shall have no 
force, as of their own nature they have not ; and that 
the authors of these iniquitous deeds shall abide the 
punishment of the ecclesiastical laws ; but deign grant 
to me, who am neither convicted, censured, or ac- 
counted guilty, the privilege of enjoying, as ever, 
your letters and affection, and the society of my for- 
mer friends .” 3 

St. Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, in the second Book 
of his Commentaries, explaining these words of the 
Gospel of Saint John — ‘Thou art Simon the son 
of Jona ; thou shalt be called Cephas, which is, inter- 
preted, Peter ,’ 4 saith — “ He who knows our hearts and 

1 Chrysost. tom. 2. homil. 55. in Matt. cap. xvi. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 5. lib. 2. sacerdotio. 

3 Chrysost. tom. 5, epist ad Innocentium primum Papam, versus 
finem epistolae. 

* John 1. 42. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 59 

reins, sees, by virtue of his Divinity, at what a degree 
of piety his disciple is to arrive, and to how great per- 
fection of virtue he is to be exalted. For He is ig- 
norant of nothing — he who knows all things, even be- 
fore they are. Hereby, he teaches the forementioned 
disciple in particular, that he, because he is God, 
knoweth all things without the aid of a teacher. For 
without any previous discourse, and without institut- 
ing any inquiry, in order to learn who would come to 
him or from whence, he calleth both himself and 
his father by name, and, authoritatively claiming 
him as his own, doth not suffer that he should be long- 
er called Simon ; but ordains that he should, by an 
appropriate simile, be called Peter, from na^o, (a rock) 
that, namely, upon which he was about to found his 
Church.” 1 And the same Cyril, in the fourth Book 
of his Commentaries, explaining the following words of 
the Gospel of Saint John — ‘ Therefore Simon Peter 
answered him : Lord, to whom shall w r e go 1 Thou 
hast the words of eternal life,’ 2 observes — “ Through 
him alone, who was exalted above the rest, they all 
make answer.” And immediately after, he adds: “ It 
was therefore an act of prudenco becoming saints, to 
confer on him, w r ho was superior in place and rank , the 
part of answering in the name of all.” 3 In his Epistle 
to Pope Celestine, also, Cyril recognizes in him, as the 
successor of Peter, this same jurisdiction. For when 
string therein the case of Nestor, he subjoins : “ But 
though such be the fact, yet we have not dared confi- 
dently to forsake his communion, until we should first 
put your holiness in possession of the particular circum- 
stances.”* To him Celestine replies: “Wherefore, 
using the authority of our chair, for which you have 
applied, and empowered to act in our stead, you shall 
execute its sentence not without the most vigorous 

1 Cyrill. Alexand. lib. 2. comment, in Joannem. 2 John vi. 69 

3 Cyrill. Alexand. lib. 4. comment, in Joannem. 

* Cyrilli epist. ad Crelestin. Papam. 


60 white’s confutation 

severity : for unless, within an interval of ten days, to 
be computed from the date of this our admonition, he 
(Nestor), in the words prescribed, anathematize his ne- 
farious doctrine; and unless he pledge himself for the fu- 
ture to confess that faith respecting the generation of 
Christ our God, which the Roman Church, and your 
Church, and which, in fine, the universal religion declar- 
eth to be the Christian faith, we charge you forthwith to 
undertake the care of his diocess. And let him under- 
stand, that he is wholly and entirely separated from 
our body,” &c. 1 That Cyril executed the injunction 
contained in this epistle, is evident from his letter 
written from the synod of Alexandria to Nestor res- 
pecting his excommunication. Therein we read as 
follows, — “ Which, unless you do within the time 
specified and defined in the letter of our most hallow- 
ed and revered brother, and fellow-minister, Celestine, 
Bishop of Rome, know for certain, that you shall 
henceforth have no participation or intercourse with 
the bishops and priests of God — in a word, that you 
shall have no place among them.” 2 See his next epistle 
to the clergy and people of Constantinople. 

Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, writing to Renatus, a 
Roman priest, says — “ They have stript me of my 
priesthood, and they now cast me out of the city, 
reverencing neither my old age, nor my gray hairs 
nurtured in piety. Wherefore, I beseech you to pre- 
vail on the most holy Archbishop (of Rome) to use 
his apostolic power, and command me to hasten to 
your council. For that most holy see hath on many 
accounts, the headship over the churches spread 
throughout the whole world,” 3 &c. 

In his epistle to Pope Leo, the same Theodoret 
says : — “ If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet 


1 Caelestin. epist. ad Cyrill. fratrem. versus finem. 

2 Cyrill. epist. in Sinodo. Alexand. ad Nestor, de excommunica- 
tione ejus. 

8 Theodoret, epist. ad Renatum presbyterum Romanum. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


61 


of the Holy Ghost, betook himself for advice to the 
great Peter, in order to obtain from him an explana- 
tion for those who, at Antioch, were disputing con- 
cerning the legal rite of circumcision how much 
more justly ought we, poor, frail and lowly creatures 
as we are, to approach your apostolic chair, that we 
may receive from you a salutary antidote against the 
consuming disease which is making such ravages 
among the faithful in these quarters.” And a little 
after he says — •“ But as for my part, I await the sen- 
tence of your apostolic chair, and pray and beseech 
that your holiness will assist me, appealing to your 
upright and just tribunal ; and also that you will com- 
mand me to appear before you, and prove that my 
doctrine strictly accords with that delivered by the 
Apostles.” Further on, he adds — “ Above all things, 
I beg to be instructed by you, whether I ought, or 
ought not, to acquiesce in being thus unjustly deposed ? 
I await your sentence. Because if you order me to 
remain among the condemned, I shall do so ; neither 
will I afterwards give annoyance to any man — but 
await the impartial judgment of our God and Sa- 
viour .” 1 

Theodoret was restored by Pope Leo, and sat in 
the council of Chalcedon, as appears from the first 
act of that council, in which we read as follows : 

* Saints Paul and Barnabas, whose private judgments, it will be 
allowed, were superior to those of our modern Evangelizers, as being 
confessedly inspired, decided against the Judeans and Antioch ians, 
that circumcision was a yoke from which Christ had made them 
free. The Judeans and Antiochians, however, appealed from the 
judgment of both these inspired Apostles to a Council at Jerusa- 
lem. Saints Paul and Barnabas did not reprove them for so doing; 
but acknowledged the right and validity of the appeal. Now if 
every one's judgment be the rule of faith established by Christ, 
where was the wisdom or utility of the appeal in this case ? On 
the contrary, such appeal, if the advocates of private judgment 
speak truth, was not only useless but wicked — because, in that case, 
it was an appeal from the rule of faith, instituted by Christ, to an 
authority not instituted by Him. Behold the monstrous absurdity 
resulting from the pernicious doctrine of our modern self-choosers ! 

1 Theodoret. epist. ad Leonem primum Papam. 

6 


62 


white’s confutation 


“ Let the right reverend bishop Theodoret enter, that 
he may take part in the business of the synod ; for 
the most holy archbishop Leo has restored his 
bishopric to him .” 1 See also the eighth act of the 
same council, wherein the restoration of Theodoret 
is more fully treated of. 


CHAPTER XIII. 

The same Doctrine is supported hy the testimony and 
authority of the Councils . 

The Fathers, Greek as well as Latin, have taught 
that there existed in Peter, and exists in his succes- 
sors, a hierarchy of the very nature which we have 
now explained. And not only did they teach this 
doctrine on ordinary occasions, but also when assem- 
bled in council ; and they availed themselves of these 
opportunities to explain and define it at greater or 
lesser length, according to the necessity that existed 
at the particular period when each council was holden. 
For instance, the Fathers of the first GEcumenical 
council of Nice, suitably to the exigence of that time, 
thought the sovereignty of the Roman Pontiff was 
sufficiently manifested by the fact of his bestowing 
and preserving, in virtue of his proper authority , the 
privileges and immunities of the other patriarchs ; 
and, in consequence, they but briefly explained it, as 
may be seen in the sixth canon of the council of Nice, 
particularly as that canon is cited by Paschasinus, 
vicar of the apostolic chair, in the sixteenth act of 
the council of Chalcedon , 2 and explained by Pope 
Nicholas the First, in his epistle to the emperor Mi- 
chael 3 . Yet, though brief their explanation of his 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, concil. Chalced. CEcumen., Act. 1. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. CEcumen., Act. xvi. 

s Tom. 1 . Conciliorum, epist. Nicholai Papte ad Michaelem Au- 
guatum. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


63 


sovereignty (in order that they may furnish to poste- 
rity a bright example of obedience to the apostolic 
chair), they besought, at the hands of Pope Sylvester, 
the confirmation of their canons, which will be evi- 
dent to whoever reads the epistle addressed to him by 
the Synod on that subject . 1 

But, on the other hand, the fourth (Ecumenical 
council of Chalcedon, owing to the nefarious conduct 
of Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, stated more 
distinctly, and maintained with greater firmness, the 
authority of Peter, in the person of his successor Leo 
the First — because the occasion so required. We read 
in the first act of this council, that the emperor Mar- 
tian, in the speech which he there delivered, says, the 
most holy pope Leo “ governs the Apostolic throne .” 
And in the same act, Leo’s vicars, with the approba- 
tion of the council, declare in a more detailed manner 
the power of his See. For, immediately after the 
emperor’s speech, we read these words — “ Then Pas- 
chasinus, a right reverend Prelate and vicar of the 
Apostolic chair, standing in the midst of his right 
reverend colleagues, said: ‘We hold in our hands 
the precepts of that most holy and apostolic man, the 
pope of Rome, which is the head of all the churches, 
whereby his Apostleship hath deigned to command, 
that Dioscorus, archbishop of Alexandria, shall not 
sit in the council ; but be suffered to come in, that he 
may obtain a hearing. This precept we must observe. 
If then your highness so direct, let him retire ; other- 
wise we withdra w.” And a little further on we read 
as follows — “ Lucentius, a right reverend Prelate and 
vicor of the Apostolic chair, said : ‘ He (Dioscorus) 
must account for the judgment he pronounced ; for 
when he possessed not the office of judge, he surrepti- 
tiously crept into it, and had the audacity to hold a 
synod without the authority of the Apostolic chair — 

A THING THAT NEVER HAS BEEN, AND NEVER COULD BE 


i Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. a Synodo Nicena ad Sylvest. Papam. 


64 


white’s confutation 


lawfully DONE.’ ” — Then Paschasinus, a bishop and 
vicar of the apostolic chair, said : “ These things are 
so. We cannot act contrary to the commands of the 
most holy and apostolic pope, governor of the apos- 
tolic chair, neither can we act contrary to the ecclesi- 
astical rules, or the precedents of the Fathers .” 1 

Moreover, the third act, containing the sentence 
passed on Dioscorus, which is to be found in the let- 
ter addressed to him from the council, runs thus : 
“ Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, arch- 
bishop of great and ancient Rome, hath through us 
and the present holy synod, together with the thrice 
blessed and all-praise-deserving apostle Peter, who is 
the rock and pillar of the Catholic Church, and the 
foundation of the true faith, stript him (Dioscorus) of 
his episcopal dignity, and also removed him from the 
discharge of all sacerdotal duty.” Immediately after 
these words, we read — “ Anatolius, archbishop of 
royal Constantinople, which is called new Rome, de- 
livered himself thus : “ Knowing all the particulars 
of these acts of the apostolic chair, I willingly agree 
to the sentence of condemnation passed upon Diosco- 
rus, formerly bishop of the great city of Alexandria,” 
&c. And in the same place, after many of the bish- 
ops had subscribed to the sentence passed on Diosco- 
rus, we read as follows : “ I, Paschasinus, bishop of 
the church of Lilybasum, presiding over this holy sy- 
nod in the stead of the most holy and apostolic Leo 
of the city of Rome, pope of the universal church, have 
subscribed to the condemnation of Dioscorus with the 
consent of the universal council .” 2 

The Fathers of the council then wrote to the em- 
perors, stating the reasons why they deposed Diosco- 
rus, and amongst others, they mention the following 
cause — “ But whereas, in addition to his other iniqui- 

1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. Oratio. Marti- 
ani Imperatoris. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. Litter® direct® 
ad Dioscorum, &c. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


65 


ties, he also inveighed against the apostolic chair, and 
attempted to issue letters of excommunication against 
the most holy and blessed pope Leo,” &C . 1 In the 
same act, the fathers, in their report to pope Leo 
concerning the general business transacted by the 
holy synod of Chalcedon, thus write — “ Which doc- 
trine” (to wit, the doctrine of Christ), “you, the 
unanimously appointed interpreter of the words of 
the blessed Peter, have preserved as a train descend- 
ing from the gold-woven garment of Christ, and 
reaching even to us by the command of the Law- 
giver.” A little after, they say : “ But if where two 
or three are gathered together in his name, he pro- 
mised to be there in the midst of them : what peculiar 
favour must he show to priests, they who have preferred 
to country and to children, the knowledge of his faith ! 
Over these priests you indeed preside as the head 
over the members, manifesting benevolence to such 
as observe your orders,” &c. And again — “ But in 
addition to all these acts, he, moreover, extended his 
fury even against him, to whom the care of the vine- 
yard has been committed by our Saviour, that is, 
against your apostolic holiness; and he meditated 
excommunication against you, who display such 
prompt zeal in uniting the body of the church .” 2 
See more on this subject in the same act, act the 
third. 

Finally, in the sixteenth act, which contains the 
allocution of the holy and universal council of Chal- 
cedon to the emperor Martian, the Fathers, amongst 
other things, have the following — “ But, O you the 
beloved of Christ, who are most deserving of the 
empire bestowed on you by the will of heaven, you, 
by your faith, make a return to him, who hath con- 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. Epist. Concilii 
Chalced. ad Valentinian. et Martianum Imperatores. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. Relatio Sanct® 
Synodi Chalcedon. ad B. Papam Leonem, dc omnibus gestis gene 
raliter. 


6 * 


66 


white’s confutation 


ferred those great benefits on you ; by your zeal for 
having the pure religion confessed, you display the 
excellence of the devotion by which you are actuated 
— curbing, it is true, the projects of the wicked, but 
declaring peace to all in the unity of pious confession : 
and, as the seal of the sacred doctrine, you strengthen 
by the authority of the chair of Peter, the decrees of 
this council, which you have been the instrument of 
gathering together,” &C . 1 

In the general council of Florence also, which was 
holden after the union of the Eastern with the West- 
ern Church, the rights of the apostolic see of Rome, 
because the exigence of the occasion so required, are 
defined with greater precision. In the last session of 
that council, the Fathers decree as follows: “We, 
moreover, define the holy and Apostolic see, and the 
Roman Pontiff, to be possessed of the primacy over 
the entire world ; that he is the successor of the bles- 
sed Peter, prince of the apostles ; that he is the true 
vicar of Christ, head of the entire church and father 
and teacher of all Christians ; and that to him, in the 
person of the blessed Peter, was committed by our 
Lord Jesus Christ, the full power of feeding, directing* 
and governing the universal Church, even as it is 
contained in the acts of the CEcumenical councils, and 
in the sacred canons .” 2 

The general council of Constance condemned the 
doctrine of John Wickleff, comprised in forty-five arti- 
cles, the forty-first of which runs as follows — “ It is 
not necessary unto salvation to believe that the Roman 
Church is supreme among the other churches .” 3 

It would be easy for us to go on multiplying the 
testimonies as well of general as national councils, 
which confirm the forementioned doctrine. But the 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 16. Responsio seu 
Allocutio sancti et universalis Chalcedonensis Concilii ad Martianum 
Imperatorem. 

2 Tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Florentin. sess. 8. 

3 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Constant, sess. 8. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


67 


few quotations we have already adduced from them, 
will suffice for such as love the truth and are desi- 
rous of finding it; whereas these authorities being 
multiplied would not avail those who gainsay and re- 
sist it. 


CHAPTER XIV. 

The same Doctrine is proved from the practice of the 

Apostolic Chair , and the subject at length concluded. 

We shall now conclude this subject by showing, 
that the Roman Pontiffs, as the successors of Peter, 
have always and everywhere, in their own persons, 
and through their vicars, exercised this universal 
jurisdiction in divers and most important causes, and 
particularly against those who possessed the greatest 
power and influence in the Church. 

For instance, Pope Felix the Third deposed Aca- 
cius, Bishop of Constantinople, as is evident from his 
epistle to Acacius, which contains the very sentence 
of his condemnation . 1 In the same epistle Pope Felix 
relates, that Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, had been 
deposed by his predecessor. Pope Sixtus the Third, 
acting by his legates, deposed Polychronius Bishop of 
Jerusalem, as is related by Pope Nicholas the first in 
his epistle to the Emperor Michael . 2 And Pope Julius 
the First restored Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, 
Paul, Bishop of Constantinople, and Marcellus, Bishop 
of Ancyra, all of whom had been unjustly deposed by 
the Eastern Synod, as is related by Sozomen the His- 
torian . 3 

Pope Fabian imposed mandates on the Eastern 
Bishops respecting Chrism — at the same time threat- 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Felicis Pap® ad Acacium. 

2 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, epist. Nicolai Pap© ad Michaelem Impe- 
ratorem. 

s Sozom. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 3. c. 7. 


68 


white’s confutation 


ening those who should refuse obedience . 1 Pope 
Victor excommunicated such of the Asiatic bishops 
as did not acquiesce in his mandates respecting the 
observance of Easter . 2 And although Irenosus and 
others reprehended Victor for this act — because they 
though it was not done advisedly, and prudently, and 
for the welfare of the Church ; yet we do not find 
that he was charged by Irenseus, or any other person 
of his age, with having done that ivhich he had not 
the power of doing, or for having exercised power 
over those, who were not subject to him. Pope Inno- 
cent the First excommunicated the Emperor Arcadius 
and his wife Eudoxia, who resided at Constantinople, 
in order to punish them for the banishment of St. 
John Chrysostom, as appears by the epistle of Inno- 
cent to Nicephorus . 3 

Pope Alexander the Third passed judgment, 
through his legates, on Henry the Second, King of 
England, who was accused of the murder of Thomas, 
Archbishop of Canterbury. And to these legates, 
King Henry, seeing that they represented the person 
of the Roman Pontiff, humbly submitted himself, as is 
related by William of Newbury, in his history of 
England. “ The King,” says this English Historian, 
“ when he found himself almost universally charged 
with the murder of that blessed man, and, above all, 
when the French Princes, the constant rivals of his 
felicity, instigated the Apostolic chair against him, as 
against the real and undoubted author of this enor- 
mous crime, sent Nuncios to Rome, in order to miti- 
gate by the modesty of his solicitations the odium that 
had been excited against him. When they arrived 
there, so great was the public execration and disgust 
at the conduct of the King of England, that they were 
scarcely admitted. But by constantly alleging, that 


i Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Fabiani Papa3 ad oinnes Orientates 

Episcopos. 

3 Euseb. Csesarien. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 5. c. 24. 

•Nicephor. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 13. c. 24. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 69 

this foul deed had not been perpetrated by the com- 
mand, or with the consent of their Sovereign, they at 
length prevailed on the Pope to send legates a latere 
into Gaul, who, being invested with full power, should, 
after carefully hearing and diligently investigating 
the cause, either clear the King’s character; or, in 
case he were found guilty, punish him with ecclesias- 
tical censure. All was done accordingly. For there 
were sent from the Apostolic chair, two venerable 
cardinals — namely, Albert, who afterwards presided 
over the same See, and Theodosius. — They proceeded 
into Gaul, and convened in the territory of the King 
of England a numerous assemblage, composed of ec- 
clesiastics and of the King’s nobles. The King ap- 
peared amongst them with extreme humility, repeat- 
edly and invariably affirming, that the deed whereby 
his reputation suffered such injury, had been perpe- 
trated neither with his consent, nor by his ordinance 
— and that no circumstance ever occurred which 
caused him more poignant grief and anguish of mind. 
Whereupon, the legates solemnly undertook his ac- 
quittal. He did not indeed deny, that these homicides 
had been furnished with a favourable pretext, and had 
been emboldened to commit the mad act, in conse- 
quence of some incautious expressions that escaped 
him, when, upon hearing of the suspension of the 
bishops, and whilst under the influence of boundless 
passion, he indulged in the use of intemperate lan- 
guage : and for this (said the King) I do not object to 
the infliction of Christian discipline — Decree what you 
please , I will devoutly receive and execute your decree. 
So saying — and throwing off his robes — according to 
the custom of public penitents, he submitted himself 
barebacked for the purpose of receiving ecclesiastical 
discipline,” 1 &c. 

In a word, the bishops of Rome conducted foreign 
ecclesiastical causes through the medium of their 


i Gulielmus Neubrigensis, lib. 2. reruin Anglicarum, c. 25. 


70 


white’s confutation 

vicars — reserving the more important ones for THE 
CHAIR. Pope Leo the First had Anastasius, bishop 
of Thessalonica, as his vicar in the East . 1 Pope Hor- 
misdas had Salust, bishop of Hispalis, for his vicar 
through Baetica and Lusitania . 2 Pope Gregory the 
Great had Virgil, bishop of Arles, as his vicar in 
Gaul . 3 

These and many similar proofs, which can be ad- 
duced, sufficiently demonstrate the universal power 
of the Apostolic See in the government of the Church; 
and at the same time, reduce to the lowest extremity, 
and utterly confute, those who deny and obstinately 
resist it.* 


* 1 Leo, epist. 84. Anastasio Episcopo Thessalonicensi. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Hormisdae ad Salustium Hispalens. 
Episcopum, &c. 

3 Greg. 1., 4. epist. exRegistro c. 96. 

* The authorities quoted in the preceding chapters, to prove the 
supreme spiritual jurisdiction of Peter and his successors, are such 
as every person possessing a knowledge of the ancient history of the 
world must respect and revere. They are the brightest names that 
illustrate the pages of history ; and neither before nor since have there 
appeared men of greater zeal, piety, learning, and research. With 
the exception of the renowned Saint Bernard, they all flourished 
within that early period, when even those who now deny the right 
of the Roman See to govern the Church, admit that the doctrine of 
the Church of Rome retained its Apostolic purity. Hence every 
authority cited in the foregoing chapters, is entitled to the best con- 
sideration of those, who deny to the Bishop of Rome the right of go- 
verning the Church, whilst they concede that right, so far as in their 
power lies, to the temporal Sovereigns of England, as will be seen 
in the following chapter of this work. The perfect unanimity of 
the Fathers of the Greek as well as of the Latin Church — of Bernard, 
Jerom, Optatus, Augustin, Cyprian — of Ircnoeus, Chrysostom, Cyril, 
and Theodoret — in recognizing the supreme spiritual jurisdiction of 
the Roman See, must inevitably lead every reflecting mind to the con- 
clusion, that this right was universally acknowledged throughout the 
Church of God in the early ages of Christianity. Add to the author- 
ity of Scripture, and of these distinguished Fathers, who wrote in 
different countries and at different periods of time, the weight of the 
Councils now cited, and which were composed of representatives from 
all quarters of the then known world ; and to both these considera- 
tions, add the fact of the Bishops of Rome exercising, without any 
one questioning their right so to do, the most uncontrolled privilege 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


71 


CHAPTER XV. 

The doctrine comprised in the second conclusion of the 

Thirty-seventh Article , is examined and confuted. 

As though it were not enough for Church-of-Eng- 
land Protestants to have taught, in the articles of their 
religion, disobedience to the Roman Pontiff, Christ’s 
Vicar established for the feeding of his sheep ; they, 
heaping error upon error, have sacrilegiously ascribed 
to their own sovereigns those things which properly 
appertain to the province of ecclesiastical and spiri- 
tual jurisdiction. 

Nicholas Sanderus, an English Doctor of Divinity, 
exposes, from the English laws themselves, the lati- 
tude of this usurpation. For, in his work on the 
Anglican schism, he thus writes. In the first place, 
saith he, the law runs as follows : — “ Every privilege, 
pre-eminence, prerogative, spiritual superiority which 
can be enjoyed or exercised by any power, or by any 
human or ecclesiastical right, appertaining to the 
visitation, correction, or reformation of the entire 
clergy , or of any particular ecclesiastical persons ; 
to the cognizance, and even to the punishment of all 
errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, &c., we decree that 
the same shall from henceforth he for ever annexed to 
the ROYAL SCEPTRE:” 

“We also decree — that the Queen now hath, and 
that she, her heirs and successors in the Royal dignity, 
shall have from henceforth, full power of nominating 


of creating-, suspending, and restoring bishops ; of bestowing and 
withdrawing bishoprics ; of adjudicating on ecclesiastical causes, in- 
volving the interests of persons of the highest earthly rank : and let us 
then ask, can there possibly exist a doubt that the supreme spiritual 
jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome was universally recognized, and 
firmly established in the earliest ages of the Church ? And if acknow- 
ledged then, why should it not be equally so now ? 

In order to ascertain the respective ages in which the above-quoted 
Fathers flourished, and Councils were holden, see the appendix at the 
end of this Treatise. 


72 


white’s confutation 


and substituting whatsoever persons they please ; 
which persons, acting in their stead and by their au- 
thority, shall exercise the same ecclesiastical jurisdic- 
tion, according to their ( that is the Royal) pleasure ; 
shall visit individuals, punish heresies, schisms, errors, 
and abuses ; or exercise any other right or power, 
which ever could or ought to be exercised by any 
ecclesiastical magistrate.” 

It is further decreed — “ That the clergy shall not 
assemble in any Synod on letters and mandates other 
than the Royal letters and mandates ; neither shall 
they pass or execute any canon, law, synodal or pro- 
vincial constitution, without the express consent of her 
Majesty , and her license for the making, promulgat- 
ing, or executing of such canons — under the penalty 
of imprisonment and fine, to be imposed at the 
Queen’s pleasure.” 

It is decreed — “ That no one shall go out of the 
Kingdom and territories of her Majesty, to any visi- 
tation, council, convocation, or congregation, which 
shall anywhere be holden on the cause of religion : 
but that all such shall be holden, by Royal authority y 
within the Kingdom.” 

It is, moreover, decreed — “ That Bishops shall not 
be created by the nomination or choice of any person, 
or by any authority other than the Royal authority ; 
neither shall they hold or exercise episcopal jurisdic- 
tion and authority, unless at the pleasure of the 
Queen ; neither is their authority derived otherwise 
than THROUGH HER, AND FROM HER ROY- 
AL MAJESTY.” 1 * * 


1 Nicolaus Sanderus. de Schismate Anglicano, lib. 3. Leges de po- 
testate Regia in rebus ecclesiasticis, anno primo Elizabethte latse. 

* Here, surely, are powers beyond limit bestowed on the British 
Sovereign ! And may we be permitted to ask, which is it more 
seemly and advisable — that these spiritual powers should be vested in 
a man, whose profession duly qualifies him for the exercising of them 
for the general good, or that they be vested in the temporal Sove- 
reign of the state, whose very sex, as is the case in the present day, 
disqualifies her, if Scripture be regarded, from at all meddling in 
ecclesiastical affairs ? 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDI8M. 73 

This usurpation excited, not only the just indigna- 
tion of Catholics, but also operated powerfully in 
driving many Presbyterians in Great Britain — people 
to whom the very name of the Roman Pontiff' is 
odious — to those violent and seditious excesses which 
have recently disturbed the public peace. For they 
maintained that this usurpation violated the rights of 
the Church, which they conceived. to be constituted 
solely of themselves, and such as held like religious 
opinions. 

Pious and just Christian Kings and Queens, in 
former times, were, and they still are indeed, the 
nursing fathers and nursing mothers of the Church :* 
many things calculated to adorn and promote religion 
have been done by them ; and, surely, it is the duty 
of those who acknowledge themselves indebted to His 
goodness for the kingdoms they hold on this earth, to 
take a special interest in advancing the Kingdom of 
Christ — which is his Church. 

St. Augustin, weighing these words of the Psalmist 
— * And now, O ye Kings, understand ; receive in- 
struction, you that judge the earth. Serve ye the 
Lord with fear : and rejoice unto him with trembling ,’ 2 
saith, — “ How then do Kings serve the Lord with 
fear, unless by prohibiting and punishing, with reli- 
gious severity, whatever is done contrary to the com- 
mandments of the Lord? For he serves after one 
manner, because he is a man ; after another, because 
he is also a King. Because he is a man, he serveth 
God by living faithfully : but because he is also a 
King, he serveth him by enforcing, with suitable 
rigour, laws which enjoin what is just, and prohibit 
the contrary. Thus it was that Ezechias served, by 
destroying the groves, and the temples of idols, and 
the high places constructed in direct opposition to the 
commandments of God . 3 Thus Josias served, he, too, 


Isaias xlix. 23. 

7 


2 Psal. ii. 10, 11. 


3 4 Kings xviii. 


74 


white’s confutation 


acting in like manner . 1 Thus the King of the Nine- 
vites served, by compelling the universal city to ap- 
pease the Lord . 2 Thus Darius served, by delivering 
into the power of Daniel the idol to be destroyed, and 
by casting his enemies to the lions . 3 Thus, too, Na- 
buchodonosor served, of whom we have already 
spoken, by enacting a terrible law, whereby all his 
subjects were prohibited from blaspheming God . 4 
Kings, therefore, in as much as they are Kings, serve 
the Lord, when, in order to serve him, they do what 
none but Kings can do.” And a little further on he 
says : — “ For the chain of events was so unfolded, that 
the Jews put to death the Preachers of Christ, imagin- 
ing, as the Messiah himself had foretold, that they 
were thereby rendering a service to God ; 5 that the 
Gentiles raged against the Christians ; and that the 
united power* of the martyrs proved victorious. But 
from the time that the following prophecy of Scripture 
began to be fulfilled — ‘ And all the Kings of the earth 
shall adore him : all nations shall serve him’ 6 7 — who in 
his sober senses would say to Kings : ‘ Take no heed 
as to which of your subjects protect, or which of 
them assail the Church of your Lord : it is no affair 
of yours, as King, to mind wdiich of your people 
choose to lead a religious life, or which of them prefer 
following a sacrilegious course V Who, I ask, would 
hold such language to Kings, to whom it cannot be 
said — it is no concern of yours to mind which of your 
subjects is inclined to lead a chaste, or which of them 
a licentious life V 97 

St. Gregory the Great, in his epistle to Aldibert, 


i Kings xxiii. 2 Jonas iii. 3 Daniel xiv. 

4 Daniel iii. 5 John xvi. 2. 

* In the text before me, the Latin word is potcntia (power), con- 

sequently I am obliged so to render it in English. But there is 
another reading for tins passage, in which the Latin is paiientia 

(patience) ; and this is in my mind the more correct one. 

6 Psalm lxxi. 11. 

7 August, tom. 2, epist. 50. Bonifacio viro militari. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


75 


King of the Angli, thus writes — •“ The omnipotent 
God raises to the government of nations certain good 
men — in order that through them He may dispense 
his pious gifts to all those over whom they are exalted. 
This we know to be the case with regard to the Eng- 
lish nation, over which you have been placed for this 
glorious purpose — namely, that, through the favours 
bestowed upon you, the benefits of Heaven may be 
also showered on the nation which is subject to you. 
And therefore, O glorious son, guard with anxious 
mind the grace you have received of God. Hasten 
to extend the Christian faith to all your subjects. 
Redouble your upright zeal for their conversion ; war 
against the worship of idols, and overturn their tem- 
ples; mould the minds of your subjects in perfect 
purity of life by exhorting, alarming, enticing, and 
above all by setting them the example of good works 
— that you may receive your reward in heaven from 
Him, the knowledge of whose name you shall have 
extended upon earth. For He, whose honour you 
seek to perpetuate among the nations, will, in return, 
transmit to future ages, your name wreathed with 
glory. For thus, in former days, Constantine, a most 
pious Emperor, reclaiming the Roman Republic from 
the wicked worship of idols, subjected that Republic 
together with himself to the omnipotent Lord our 
God Jesus Christ ; and turned himself and his people 
to God with all their mind. Whence it came to pass, 
that this man’s glory exceeded that of the ancient 
Princes — and he equally surpassed his predecessors in 
reputation, as he did in good works .” 1 

Christian Kings, therefore, can, and ought to pro- 
mote what belongs to God and his Church : but it 
is not their province to adjudicate on ecclesiastical 
causes, or to define matters of faith. For judgments 
in spiritual causes and matters of faith, in order to be 
right and just, must be formed according to the stand- 


i Gregor, epist. ex Regietro, lib. 9. epist. 60. Seu, c. 60. 


76 


white’s confutation 


ard of the Divine law. And as God has decreed both 
under the Old law, and under the Gospel, that the 
priests and pastors of his Church, and not secular 
princes, should be the judges of the genuine sense of 
the Divine Law ; consequently, it is the province of 
the former, and not of the latter, to decide causes of 
this nature — ‘ For the lips of the priest shall keep 
knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth: 
because he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts .’ 1 This 
same doctrine is inculcated by God in Deuteronomy, 
Paralipomenon, and in fine, throughout the whole of 
the Old Testament. 

In the New Testament, also, God has committed 
the office of judging concerning the truth of religion, 
not to Kings and secular persons, but to bishops, 
whom he gave us as “ Pastors” and “ Doctors,” until 
the day of judgment — ‘ That henceforth we be no 
more children tossed to and fro, and carried about 
with every wind of doctrine .’ 2 3 When a controversy 
arose at Antioch — as to whether circumcision, and 
the other ceremonies of the law were necessary for 
Christians, it was to the Apostles and Priests at Jeru- 
salem that all parties referred the matter for decision . 8 
And while they argued this question in the Synod — 
‘ The multitude of the laymen held their peace .’ 4 
And Paul and Silas delivered to the cities through 
which they passed, the decrees to keep, that were 
decreed by the Apostles and ancients wffio were at 
Jerusalem . 5 This same doctrine the Catholic Church 
faithfully guards and teaches ; and as she did in times 
past, so doth she now maintain it, by her authorized, 
devoted and learned “ Doctors,” against her adversa- 
ries, however powerful they may be. 

Hosius of Corduba, as can be seen in the epistles 


1 Malach. ii. 7. Read Deuteronomy xvii. 8, 9,10, &.C., and xxxiii. 

9, 10. Read also 2. Paralip. xix. 11. 

3 Ephes. iv. 11, 14. 3 Acts xv. 1, 2. 

4 Acts xv. 12. ?Acts xvi. 4. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


77 


of Athanasius, writing to the Emperor Constantius, 
who thought to arrogate to himself an undue liberty 
in favour of the Arian against the Catholic Bishops, 
thus saith : — “ What step so violent was ever taken 
by Constans ? or what bishop did he banish in his 
time ? or what instance is there of his interference in 
ecclesiastical decisions ? or what courtier of his ever 
employed force, in order to have ecclesiastical sen- 
tence passed against any individual? Can any thing 
of this kind be quoted by Valens, from which he and 
his. partisans, could derive the materials of solid rea- 
soning, or of a valid objection ? Desist, I beseech 
thee, and remember that thou art mortal — dread the 
day of judgment — preserve thyself pure against that 
day — meddle not with ecclesiastical matters — neither 
dictate to us on such subjects ; but rather learn these 
things of us. To thee, God has committed the Im- 
perial sway ; to us, he has entrusted what appertains 
to the Church. And as he who would traitorously 
decry your authority as Emperor, disobeys the Divine 
ordinance : so in like manner, do you beware, lest, 
arrogating to yourself what belongs to the Church, 
you become guilty of a heinous crime. ‘ Render,’ 
saith the Scripture, ‘ to Caesar the things that are 
Caesar’s : and to God, the things that are God’s.’ 1 
Therefore, it is not lawful for us to possess temporal 
dominion ; neither have you, O Emperor, power 
over the incense and sacred things.” And a little 
further on in his epistle, the same Hosius says : — “ Foi 
if this be the judgment of bishops, what has the empe- 
ror to do with it ? But if, on the other hand, these 
decisions be concocted under the menaces of Caesar, 
what need have men of the title of bishops ? When 
since the beginning of time, was the like heard of? 
When did the decision of the Church receive its force 
from an emperor ? Or when was the like ever recog- 
nised as a decision ? There have been very many 


2* 


l Mnt. \xii. 71. 


78 


white’s confutation 


Synods heretofore — many decisions of the Church 
have been pronounced : but neither have the Fathers 
attempted to persuade princes to things of this sort, 
nor have princes exhibited their curiosity by prying 
into ecclesiastical affairs. Paul the Apostle had friends 
in the family of Caesar, and through them he saluted 
the Philippians by Epistle ; yet he never took these 
friends as associates in the discharge of his judicial 
functions .” 1 

St. Athanasius, in the same epistle, relating the 
dialogue that passed between the emperor Constantius 
and the Catholic bishops of Gaul and Italy, says : — 
“ After summoning them before him, the Emperor 
ordered that they should subscribe to the condemna- 
tion of Athanasius, and join communion with the he- 
retics. The Bishops, marvelling at his new zeal, 
remarked — < this is no ecclesiastical canon.’ Where- 
upon the Emperor quickly replied — ‘ let my will 
stand in stead of a canon — the Syrian bishops support 
me in the use of such language — wherefore you must 
either obey, or be banished like the rest.’ When the 
bishops heard this, they were wonderfully amazed, 
and uplifting their hands to God, they advanced their 
reasonings against the emperor with much freedom : 
teaching him, that the kingdom belonged not to him, 
but to God, from whom he had received it — -and that 
he had every reason to dread, that that which God 
had bestowed on him he would suddenly take away. 
They threatened him with the awful day of judgment, 
and persuaded him not to corrupt things ecclesiastic, 
or confound the Roman Empire with ecclesiastical 
constitutions,” &c . 2 

St. Ambrose, in his epistle to the Emperor Valen- 
tinianus : — “ Dalmatius, a tribune and notary, alleg- 
ing that he acted agreeably to your , Majesty’s plea- 
sure, peremptorily required that I should select judges, 


Athanas. tom. 1. epist. ad solitariam vitam agentes. 2 Ibid. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


79 


as Auxentius had done. Yet he did not so much as 
mention the names of the parties accused; but merely 
added, that on some future day there would be a trial 
re you would preside as sove- 



communication I now return 


what appears to me a fitting answer. Neither should 
I be deemed contumacious by any person because 
I confidently maintain it, namely — ■* that your father 
of august memory, not only answered in words, but 
also decreed by his law T s, that causes of faith, and of 
ecclesiastical discipline, should be decided by those, 
whose profession duly qualified them to discharge the 
office : for the following is the tenor of his rescript 
— viz., that priests should be the judges of priests. 
And even though a bishop were arraigned on other 
grounds, and his moral conduct were to be scrutinized, 
he would have the investigation to be conducted be- 
fore an episcopal tribune. Who then has made the 
contumacious reply to your clemency ? He who de- 
sires you should imitate your father, or he who wishes 
you to be unlike him ? unless, perhaps, there be found 
individuals who depreciate the opinion of so distin- 
guished an Emperor, whose faith is proved by the 
constancy with which he confessed it, and whose wis- 
dom is proclaimed by the ameliorated condition of 
his Empire. When, most clement emperor, have you 
ever heard of laymen passing judgment on a bishop 
in a cause of faith ? Do you then imagine that I can 
be so warped by any species of adulation as to forget 
my sacerdotal rights, and think of entrusting to others 
what God in his bounty hath given to me ? If the 
bishop is to bo taught by the layman, what will be the 
consequence ? Let the layman then debate, and the 
bishop listen — let the bishop learn from the layman. 
But, if we examine the order of the Divine Scriptures, 
or unfold the ancient annals, who can deny that in 
matters of faith, in matters of faith, I say, the bishops 
were wont to pass judgment on Christian emperors, 
and not the emperors on bishops?” Towards the 


80 


white's confutation 


end of this epistle, he says : “ If there is to be a con- 
ference respecting faith, it should be a conference of 
priests, as was the case under Constantine, a prince 
of august memory, who premised no restrictive con- 
ditions, but allowed to priests the uncontrolled right 
of judgment,” &C . 1 

Again, in the close of his oration against Auxentius, 
he says — 44 We must 4 render to Caesar the things that 
are Caesar’s, and to God, the things that are God’s.’ 
Tribute belongs to Caesar : this we do not deny. The 
Church belongs to God, therefore it should not be 
handed over to Caesar : for the temple of God cannot 
be the right of Caesar. And that this is said to the 
honour of the emperor, no man can refuse to admit. 
For what is more honourable than that the emperor be 
styled the son of the Church ? When he is so named 
he is named without sin, he is named so with grace. 
For a good emperor is within the Church, not above 
it. He endeavours to aid, not to coerce her .” 2 * 

Finally, the same St. Ambrose, in an epistle to his 
sister Marcellina, informing her of what took place 
with regard to the surrendering of the Cathedrals, 
says: — “In a word, the following mandate issues: 
4 Surrender the Cathedral.’ I answer : 4 It is neither 
lawful for me to surrender it, nor meet for you, O 
Emperor, to accept it. You have no right to violate 
the house of a private citizen ; and do you imagine 
that the House of God can be taken away?’ It is 
then alleged : 4 To the emperor all things are lawful, 
all things are his.’ To this I answer : 4 Lay not on 
thy conscience, O Emperor, the grievous responsibi- 
lity of believing that thou possessest any imperial right 
over things divine. Do not extol thyself; but, if thou 
desirest to reign long, be subject to God. It is writ- 
ten — ‘Render to God the things that are God’s, and 


1 Ambr. tom. 3. lib. 5. Epistolarum, epist. 32. Yalentiniano Aug. 
in principio. 

2 Ambros. tom. 3. lib. 5. epistolarum, Oratio in Auxentium de 

basilicis tradendia. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 81 

to Csssar, the things that are CEesar’s.” Palaces be- 
long to the emperor, churches to the priest. To thee 
is committed the right of the public walls, not of the 
sacred edifices /’ 1 2 

St. Augustin thus reproves the schismatic Donatists, 
for referring the judgment of bishops to the emperor 
Constantine — “ We reprove them the more,” saith he, 
“ for this reason, that, when they unjustly accused 
Caecilianus to the emperor — whom, surely, they ought 
first to have convicted before his transmarine col- 
leagues — and when the emperor, whose conduct was 
far more becoming than theirs, deputed to the bishops 
the episcopal cause referred to him, they, though de- 
feated, would not be at peace with their brethren ; 
but again appeared before the same emperor. On the 
second occasion, they accused before this temporal 
prince, not only Caecilianus, but also the bishops who 
had been appointed his judges. And after this too, 
they, a third time, appealed to the same emperor from 
another episcopal decision .” 3 These are the words 
of Augustin. But although the good emperor, for the 
sake of the peace of the Church, which lie vehement- 
ly desired, yielded to the fury of the Donatists so far 
as to hear this cause, after the bishops ; yet he exe- 
crated their madness, which forced him to do so, and 
he declared the trial was of such a nature that he 
should sue for pardon from the bishops for having at 
all meddled with it. This fact is attested by authors 
of the most unimpeachable veracity. 

St. Optatus of Milevis, in the Council of Bishops, 
relating the sentence of Pope Miltiades, by which 
Caecilianus was declared innocent, adds — “ And yet 
Donatus imagined there could be an appeal from the 
bishops. To which appeal the emperor Constantine 
thus replied : — O the unbridled impudence of reli- 


1 Matt xxii. 21. 

2 Ambros. tom. 3. lib. 5., epist. 33. ad Marcellinam sororem. 

» August, tom. 2., epist. Vincentio ex hseresi Rogatiana. 


82 


white’s confutation 


gious frenzy! These fanatics have lodged an appeal 
just as pagans are wont to do in their lawsuits .” 1 

St. Augustin, also, chiding the impudence and obsti- 
nacy of these schismatics, says : — “ They had indeed 
the audacity to accuse, of a corrupt decision, the 
bishops, ecclesiastical judges of such high authority, 
by whose sentence both the innocence of Csecilianus, 
and their own wickedness had been established — and 
this charge they advanced, not before the colleagues 
of the bishops, but before the emperor. He afforded 
them another trial at Arles, conducted by other bishops; 
not that this was now necessary, but yielding to their 
perverseness, and desirous of employing every means 
for the purpose of repressing their extravagant impu- 
dence. For the Christian emperor presumed not to 
entertain their tumultuous and deceitful quarrels, as if 
he were to judge the decision of the bishops who had 
sate at Rome ; but, as I have said, he gave them other 
bishops, from whom, however, they chose again to 
appeal to the emperor. You have heard how he 
detests them because of this conduct ; and would to 
God ! that even his decision had put an end to their 
insane animosities: and that as he, intending to sue for 
pardon afterwards from the holy prelates, did — in 
order to deprive them of all subject of future com- 
plaint, should they not obey the sentence of him to 
whom they themselves appealed — so far yield to their 
importunities as to judge their cause after the bishops, 
so they too would at length yield to the truth .” 2 

Again, St. Augustin, treating of the case of Casci- 
lianus, which was referred by the Donatists to the 
Emperor, before it had been decided at Rome, adds — 
“ But as Constantine did not presume to pass judg- 
ment in an episcopal cause, he deputed it to be dis- 
cussed, and finally decided by the bishops. This was 
done in the city of Rome by Melciades, Bishop of that 

1 Optat. Milcv. de schismate Donatist. adv. Parmenianum, lib. 1. 

2 August, tom. 2., epist. 162. de impudentia cpiscoporum Donatis- 
tarura. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. S3 

Church, sitting in judgment, and supported by many 
of his colleagues .” 1 Such is the testimony of Augus- 
tin on this subject. 


CHAPTER XVI. 

The doctrine of the thirty-seventh Article comprised in 
the third conclusion , is examined , and rejected as 
absurd. 

From what has been already said when treating of 
the two first propositions, the absurdity of the third 
is sufficiently apparent. For, as the Roman Pontiff 
is the father of all Christians, all Christian kingdoms 
are subject to his jurisdiction. Are not children 
bound to obey their father ? Is not the Kingdom of 
England Christian ? And if it is Christian, God for- 
bid that it should be a Kingdom of Independents ! 
Return, brethren, to the obedience of the one common 
father. 

You affirm that you are of the sheep of Christ, and 
Christ saith — ‘ My sheep hear my voice ; and I know 

them, and they follow me .’ 2 Hear ye, therefore, the 
voice of Christ saying to Peter and his successors — 

‘ Feed my lambs : feed my sheep .’ 3 Does not he 

then, who wishes Peter and his successors to feed his 

sheep and lambs, also wish his sheep and lambs to be 
obedient to those charged with the office of adminis- 
tering food to them ? “ Whoever imagines,” saith 

Leo the First, “ that the supremacy is to be denied 
to Peter, can in n^ wise derogate from his dignity ; 
but, inflated with the spirit of pride, that man plungeth 
himself into hell .” 4 And St. Cyprian, in his Trea-J 
tise on the * Unity of the Church,’ asks — “ Can he 


1 August, tom. 2., epist. 166. 2 John x. 27. 

3 John xxi. 16, 17. 

4 Leo, epist. 89. ad episcopos per Viennensem Provinciam titulos. 


84 


white’s confutation 


who forsakes the chair of Peter, on which the Church 
is founded, be sure that he is in the Church ?” 

We shall now conclude this chapter with the words 
of Osvin, King of the Northumbrians, as related by 
the venerable Bede in his Ecclesiastical History. In 
the synod that was holden for the purpose of termi- 
nating the controversy which raged between the Eng- 
lish and Scotch, concerning the observance of Easter, 
&c., Vilfridus, a priest, argued as follows against 
Colmanus, a Scottish Bishop — “ ‘ But if you and your 
associates disdain to follow the decree of the Apostolic 
see, nay, of the universal Church, and these, too, con- 
firmed by Holy Writ, doubtless you are guilty of sin. 
For even admitting that your fathers were holy men, 
why should the few of them, from one corner of a 
remote Island, be preferred to the Universal Church 
of Christ, spread throughout the world ? And could 
your Columba, nay, and ours too, if he were of 
Christ, however holy and adorned with virtues, be 
preferred to the most blessed Prince' of the Apostles ? 
— to whom our Lord saith : ‘ Thou art Peter, and upon 
this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of 
hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to 
thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ &C .’ 1 King 
Osvin, who was present during this discussion, here- 
upon said — ‘ Colmanus, were these things really said 
to Peter by our Lord V Colmanus answers — •* Verily, 
they were, O King.’ The king then says — ‘ Can you 
produce any proof of such great power having been 
bestowed on your Columba V He answers — ■* None.’ 
And again the king says — ■* Do you both perfectly 
agree that these things were said to Peter as the 
Prince, and that the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven 
were given him by our Lord?’ They answered — 
‘ Yea, both.’ Then the king concluded thus — ‘ And I 
say unto you, that he is the door-keeper, to whom I 
am unwilling to oppose myself ; but his decrees, to 


i Mat. xvi. 18, 19. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 85 

the best of my knowledge and ability, I am desirous 
of obeying in all things — lest, perhaps, on coming to 
the gates of the Kingdom of Heaven, there should he 
no one to open them for me, he being averse who is 
proved to hold the keys.’ ,?I 


CHAPTER XVII. 

The Sixth Article is examined . 

Having now discussed the thirty-seventh article, 
we proceed to the examination of the others which 
contain that doctrine, peculiarly called the doctrine 
of the Church-of-England. And in examining them, 
we shall follow the plan laid down in the beginning 
of this work — that is, we will examine them, accord- 
ing to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the 
same order as they occur in the book of the Thirty- 
nine Articles. 

The first article, then, which contains doctrine pe- 
culiar to the Church of England, is the sixth, which 
is entitled — “ Of the sufficiency of the Holy Scrip- 
tures for Salvation.” We shall now proceed to exa- 
mine this article through its component parts. It 
begins as follows — “ Holy Scripture containeth all 
things necessary to salvation : so that whatsoever is 
not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to 
be required of any man, that it should be believed as 
an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessa- 
ry to salvation.” 

EXAMINATION. 

In order to ensure salvation, it is necessary that we 
receive, and revere, whatsoever has been delivered 
on Divine authority for the edification of the Church. 
Now Christ himself, as well as his apostles, delivered 


8 


i Beda, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 3. c. 25. 


86 white’s confutation 

many things for the edification of his church, not only 
in writing, but also viva voce ; yet you reject as un- 
worthy of faith, “ all things that are not contained in 
Scripture, or expressly proved thereby.” 

W hat the apostles wrote, and what they spoke, are 
of equal authority. And it is known to every one, 
that Christ wrote nothing himself, neither did he com- 
mand his apostles to write any thing. For we read 
Christ's command, that they should teach all nations 1 
— that they should preach the Gospel to every crea- 
ture ; 2 but we find no injunction commanding them to 
write. On the contrary, the Apostle John was com- 
manded not to write certain things. The apostles all 
taught by means of preaching, before they taught by 
writing ; and such of them as afterwards wrote, did 
so, not for the purpose of handing down the entire 
doctrine of faith in writing, but, as the necessity 
arose, they supplied by letters what their absence 
rendered it impossible for them to effect by preach- 
ing : satisfied to meet each difficulty as it presented 
itself. Moreover, they did not promiscuously instruct 
all people on all subjects; for it was not expedient 
that they should do so. * Howbeit,’ saith St. Paul the 
Apostle — ‘We speak wisdom among the perfect .’ 3 
And again the same apostle, writing to the Corin- 
thians, saith — ‘ And I, brethren, could not speak to 
you, as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. As unto 
little ones in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not 
meat: for you were not able as yet: but neither 
indeed are you now able .’ 4 

St. Basil clearly and beautifully explains this doc- 
trine in the following words — “ Of the dogmas preach- 
ed in the church, we have some transmitted in writ- 
ing ; others, which were delivered in mystery, that is, 
in an occult manner, we have received by means of 
apostolic tradition. Both are equally efficacious in 


l Mat. xxviii. 19. 

3 1 Cor. ii. 6. 


2 Mark xvi. 15. 

4 1 Cor. iii. 1, 2. 


OP CHURCH-0 F-ENGLANDISM. 


87 


promoting piety ; neither does any one who has even 
the slightest pretensions to a knowledge of ecclesias- 
tical rites, object to them. For if we proceed to 
reject, as of little moment, such points as are not 
transmitted in writing, we shall, by our impudent 
daring, also condemn those things necessary to salva- 
tion, which are contained in the Gospel; nay, we 
shall reduce the whole preaching of the faith to a 
mere name. In order to furnish an instance of the 
nature of tradition, I shall begin by pointing to one 
of the earliest, and an universally adopted ceremony. 
Who has taught us in Scripture to mark with the sign 
of the cross those who have placed their hope in 
Christ ? In what part of Scripture are we taught to 
pray, facing towards the East ? Which of the Saints 
has left us in writing, the words of invocation when 
the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of Benediction 
are exposed to view? For, not content with those 
which the apostle, or the Gospel mentions, we also 
use, both before and after, as of great moment to the 
mystery, other words which we have received from 
tradition, and which have not been reduced to writing. 
Again, by what scriptural authority do we consecrate 
the water of baptism, and the oil of unction, moreover 
the person baptized ? Is it not on the authority of 
silent and occult tradition ? What words of Scrip- 
ture teach us how to anoint with oil ? Now where 
is it revealed, that man should be thrice immerged? 
I may likewise ask, from what part of Scripture do we 
derive the other ceremonies used in baptism, such as 
the renouncing of Satan and his angels 1 Is it not 
from private and occult tradition ? Is it not from the 
doctrine our Fathers preserved in silence, which 
keeps aloof vainly inquisitive and worthless idlers? 
Wisely indeed, have those truly learned men preserv- 
ed by means of silence the veneration due to the hid- 
den mysteries. For how could it be allowed to have 
the doctrine of these mysteries, which it is not lawful 
for the uninitiated to behold, publicly borne about in 


88 


WHITE S CONFUTATION 


writing ? Or what, in fine, did the great Moses mean, 
who did not suffer all parts of the temple to be free of 
access to all ; but placed the profane outside the 
sacred chancel? The front parts he reserved for 
those of superior purity, deeming the Levites alone 
worthy of ministering to the Deity. The sacrificing 
and oblation of the Holocausts, and all the remaining 
ministry he assigned to the priests ; and he received 
into the Holy of Holies one selected from amongst 
them all — neither did he allow this always, but only 
on one day in each year. Moreover, he appointed a 
certain hour of this day on which it was lawful to 
enter, in order that, by reason of its novelty and 
infrequency, they may behold with reverential awe 
the Holy of Holies — well knowing, of his wisdom, 
that things in common use, and procurable by all, are 
exposed to contempt ; but that for whatsoever is care- 
fully set apart, and is rare, we naturally entertain the 
greatest veneration and respect. After this manner 
the apostles, who, in the infancy of the church, pre- 
scribed and determined her rites, preserved in secresy 
and silence the dignity of the mysteries : and the 
Fathers have followed their example. For that which 
is divulged to popular and vulgar ears, is in no wise a 
mystery. The reason why some things were delivered 
unwritten, is, lest the knowledge of the dogmas might, 
by too great a familiarity wfith them, come into con- 
tempt among the bulk of the people. A dogma is one 
thing — an edict another. For dogmas require not to 
be published ; but edicts do. And there is a species 
of silence, yea, an obscurity that the Scripture useth, 
which exercises the untrained mind in the contempla- 
tion of dogmas ; and they again turn this to advan- 
tage in the Scriptures. For this reason we all look 
to the East when we pray. Yet few of us know, 
that in so doing we seek again our ancient country, 
namely, Paradise, which God planted in Eden, situated 
to the East. And on the first day of the week, we 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 89 

perform our public prayers standing up,” &C . 1 So 
far Basil. 

St. Chrysostom, considering the following words of 
the Apostle — ‘ Therefore, brethren, stand fast ; and 
hold the traditions which you have learned, either by 
word , or by our Epistle’ 2 — says, “ Hence it is clear 
that they did not deliver all things by epistle ; but 
many things also which were not written. And the 
latter are equally worthy of faith as the former. For 
this reason we believe the tradition of the Church also 
to be worthy of faith. It is tradition : inquire nothing 
more .” 3 

And St. Epiphanius says: — “We are obliged to 
use tradition also ; for all things cannot be learned 
from Divine Scripture. Wherefore, the holy Apos- 
tles delivered some things in writing, others by tradi- 
tion, which Saint Paul himself affirms, saying — ‘ As 
I delivered them to you ,’ 4 &c. Theophylactus, also, 
explaining the same passage, says — “ From these 
words it is evident, that Saint Paul and the other 
Apostles by no means committed to writing all the 
precepts, which they delivered to the people . 5 Again, 
in his Commentary on the second chapter of the 
second Epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians, he 
says — “ Hence, indeed, it is clear, that Paul delivered 
most things to the Thessalonians unwritten , by exhor- 
tation only, that is, by word of mouth, and not by 
Epistle. For, otherwise, the one would not be equally 
worthy of faith as the other. Let us, therefore, con- 
sider the tradition of the Church so worthy of faith, 
as to require no further evidence for whatever is 
taught by it .” 6 

l Basilius, lib. de Spiritu Sancto, ad S. Amphilochium Iconii 

episcopum, c. 27. 2 2 Thess. ii. 14. 

3 Chrysost. tom. 4., comment, in 2 Thess., c. 2, homil. 4. 

4 Epiphanius contra haereses. tom. 1. lib. 2., contra apostolicos 
lucres. 61. 

o Theophylactus, comment, in 1 Cor. xi. 2. 

6 Theophylactus, comment, in 2 Thess. ii. 14. 

8 * 


90 


white’s confutation 


St. Augustin declares that the baptism of infants 
rests on the authority of apostolic and Divine tradi- 
tion. 1 2 * The same Augustin teaches, that it is by 
Apostolic tradition we know that persons baptized by 
heretics and schismatics are not to be rebaptized.* 
In the passages now referred to, he also mentions many 
other things, which have come down by tradition from 
the Apostles. 

The Gospel was announced and preached to the 
world for several years after Christ’s ascension into 
heaven, though there was not during the time any 
written copy of it in existence. “ But suppose,” says 
St. Irenseus, disputing on this subject against the he- 
retics of his day, “ suppose the Apostles had left us 
no writings, would we not be bound to follow the rule 
of doctrine which they delivered to those to whom 
they committed their churches 1 To this rule many 
foreign nations assent — people who believe in Christ 
— who, without letters or ink, have salvation written 
on their hearts by the Spirit; and who, diligently guard- 
ing the ancient tradition, believe in one God maker of 
heaven and earth, and of all things therein, through 
Christ Jesus the Son of God — who through transcen- 
dent love for his creatures took upon Himself that sub- 
stance which was from the Virgin, He, by his own pow- 
er, uniting the human to the Divine nature, suffering 
under Pontius Pilate, and rising again ; w r as received 
w r ith glory into heaven and is to come as the Saviour 
of the good, and the Judge of the wicked, and will cast 
into eternal fire the perverters of truth, and all who 
despise the Father, and His own last coming. They 
who have held this doctrine without the aid of letters, 
although wholly ignorant of our language, opinions, 
customs, and mode of life ; yet because of their faith, 
whereby they are truly w 7 ise, they, walking in the 

1 August, tom. 3. De Genes, ad literam, lib. 10. c. 23. : et tom. 8. 
lib, 1. ad Marcellinum, de peccatorum meritis & remissione, c. 26. 

2 August, tom. 7. ‘ De Baptist.’ contra Donatist., lib. 2. c. 7. & lib. 

5. c. 23. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


91 


paths of justice, chastity, and spiritual prudence, are 
pleasing in the sight of God.” 1 These are the words 
of Irenseus. 

Finally, the divinity of the Scriptures themselves 
rests upon no other proof, than that of the tradition 
of the Apostles to the Church, and of the Church to 
us. For, why is not the Gospel of Nichodemus, or 
that said to be according to the Hebrews, received, 
as well as the Gospel of Luke and Mark, since these 
points cannot be at all decided by Scripture 1 Indeed, 
the only reason for it is — the authority of the Church. 
For the Church — ‘which is the pillar and ground of 
the truth’ 2 — and which is guided by the Spirit of truth, 
that abides with her for ever 3 — testifies through an 
uninterrupted succession of Bishops, that the latter 
were handed down by the Apostles ; but that they 
rejected the former. 

In proportion, therefore, as the faith of the Church 
regarding tradition is diminished, in the same propor- 
tion is the authority of the Gospels themselves weak- 
end. — “ I would not,” says St. Augustin, “ believe 
the Gospel, unless the authority of the Church induced 
me to do so.” And a little after, he says — “ Let the 
authority of the Catholics be once weakened, and I 
shall not thenceforth be able to believe the Gospel ; 
because I had believed it through them.” And again 
he says — “We read in the Acts of the Apostles, who 
the successor of Judas was. In this Book I am obliged 
to believe, if I believe in the Gospel ; for Catholic 
authority equally recommends both writings to me.” 4 

The absurdity of the doctrine contained in the for- 
mer part of the sixth Article, is, in our opinion, 
sufficiently apparent from what has been already said. 


1 Irenaeus adv hoereses, lib. 3. c. 4. 

2 1 Tim. iii. 15. 3 John xiv. 16, 17. 

4 August, tom. 6., lib. contra epistolam Maniclnei quam vocant 

Fundamenti, c. 5. Vide etiam, tom. 6. lib. 28. contra Faustum Mani- 
chffium, c. 2. & c. 4. 


92 


white’s confutation 


We shall accordingly proceed to the examination of 
the latter part, in which is contained the opinion of 
you, Church-of-Englandmen, respecting the canon of 
the Scriptures. You, first of all, and before this 
canon, which you have trimmed according to your 
own fancy, premise, that — “ In the name of the Holy 
Scriptures, you do understand those canonical books 
of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority 
was never any doubt in the Church” And yet, after 
enumerating the books of the Old Testament, *which 
you either receive or reject, you immediately add — 
“ All the books of the New Testament, as they are 
commonly received, we do receive , and account them 
canonical.” 

Before entering on the examination of these words, 
it is to be remarked, that many Catholics in the early 
ages doubted the canonical authority of the book of 
Esther. Among those who doubted its authority were 
St. Gregory Nazianzen before Gregory, St. Atha- 
nasius ; 1 2 and before them both, Melito, bishop of 
Sardis . 3 But passing over other books, whose canon- 
ical authority was formerly doubted of, we shall only 
mention that St. Gregory Nazianzen, and the Fathers 
of the Council of Laodicea, formerly doubted the 
canonicity of the Apocalypse . 4 

Having offered these observations, we ask you, 
Brethren, if, under the name of the Holy Scriptures, 
you understand the books of the Old and New Testa- 
ment, of whose authority was never any doubt , why 
do you receive the Apocalypse as a canonical book ? 
for respecting its authority, doubt formerly existed in 
the Church. Why then do you receive as canonical , 
a book which, according to your own definition, is 

1 Gregor. Nazian. tom. 2., De veris et germanis Scripturae libris. 
carm. 33. 

2 Athan., tom. 4., succincta Divinae Scripturae veteris ac Novi Tes- 
tamenti synopsis. 

8 Euseb. Cces. Hist. Ecclesiast., lib. 4. c. 25. 

4 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Laodicen., c. 29. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 93 

not canonical ? And yet, if you speak truth, you, 
who receive all the books of the New Testament, as 
they are commonly received, verily receive this as 
canonical ; for it is certain that it is commonly re- 
ceived as canonical. You also rank the book of 
Esther among the canonical books of the Old Testa- 
ment ; yet the Church formerly doubted its canonicity. 
How such contradictions are to be reconciled, we 
cannot possibly comprehend. 

In framing the canon of the books of the Old Tes- 
tament, you pay more regard to the Synagogue of the 
Jews, than to the Church established by Christ, which 
is alone the pillar and ground of the truth — “ And 
in which,” as St. Irenseus observes, “ as in a rich 
repository, the Apostles most abundantly laid up 
whatever is of truth, that all who wish may thence 
draw the drink of life. For this is the road to life, 
and all who teach otherwise are thieves and robbers ; 
wherefore we must shun them. But whatever is of 
the Church, that we must ardently love, and must 
hold fast to the tradition of the truth .” 1 These are the 
words of Irenseus. 

How far you carry the ardour of your love for what 
belongs to the Church, you clearly demonstrate by 
rejecting from your canon, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus, the two Books of Maccabees, and 
others which the Catholic Church enumerates amongst 
the canonical ; choosing, as you do, rather to err with 
the repudiated Synagogue of the Jews, than to em- 
brace truth with the Catholic Church, the spouse of 
Christ. But that you may the more easily cajole 
others into your own error, you add — “ Those books 
(as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example 
of life, and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it 
not apply them to establish any doctrine.” Brethren, 
this testimony of Hierome (St. Jerom) avails nothing 
to your cause. For the authority of the Scriptural 


1 Irenoeus adv. hs&reaes, lib. 3. c. 4., in principio. 


94 


white’s confutation 


books, of which St. Jerom speaks, was not in his 
time declared by the church, as it now is : and it was 
allowable to doubt those Scriptures so long as the 
question was pot satisfactorily decided between Ca- 
tholics, or confirmed by the authority of the church. 
The church did not wish to pass a final decree, and 
to ascribe Divine authority to them, until after a 
minute, prolonged, and cautious examination ; but the 
matter being now defined by the church, it is no 
longer lawful to question their canonical authority. 

It is moreover to be observed, that the church never 
doubted these Scriptures to such a degree, but that 
there were always to be found in it many and distin- 
guished Fathers, who regarded them as canonical. 
Wherefore, the tradition descending from these Fa- 
thers afforded the church, in process of time, suffi- 
cient materials for determining the question, and 
framing, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, an 
infallible decree, as she hath already done in the 
General Council of Trent . 1 But it was by no means 
in this council that the forementioned Books were 
first defined as canonical. Isidore of Hispalis, attests 
that they had long before been so defined by the 
church . 2 And before him Pope Innocent the First, 
in his epistle to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, testi- 
fies the same . 3 Also Pope Gelasius the First, in a 
Roman council containing seventy Bishops, defined 
them to be canonical . 4 So likewise did the third 
Council of Carthage, at which St. Augustin was pre- 
sent, and to the canons of which he subscribed. In 
fine, no one — unless inflated by the spirit of pride — 


1 Concii. Trident, sess. 4. Decretum de canonicis Scripturis. 

2 Isidor. Hispal., lib. 7. Originum, c. 1, de veteri et novo Testa- 
mento. 

3 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Epist. Innocentii ad Exuperium, c. 7. 

4 Tom. 1. Conciliorum. Ordo librorum veteris et Novi Testa- 
ment^ &c. 

3 Tom. 1. Conciliorum. Caput 47. Concilii Carthaginensis tertii. 


OP CHITRCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


95 


despises such high authority of the church ; and 
whosoever does opens the way, as far, as in him lies, 
for the extravagant reveries of fanatical dreamers. 


CHAPTER XVIII. 

The ninth Article examined . 

In this article, you rightly maintain with the Ca- 
tholic Church, against the Pelagians, that every man 
naturally engendered of the offspring of Adam, is 
infected with original sin . 1 2 But you do wrong in 
holding with Luther, and the other innovators, con- 
trary to the doctrine of the church, that this sin 
remains in the regenerated, although it is no imputa- 
tion against them ; and that concupiscence really is, 
and remains, a sin in those who are born again by 
baptism. Here are the words of your article — 
“ And this infection of nature doth remain — yea, in 
them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the 
flesh, called in Greek, tygovy/xa oa^xbi f which some do 
expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the 
desire of the flesh, is not subject to the law of God. 
And although there is no condemnation for them that 
believe and are baptized ; yet the apostle doth confess, 
that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature 
of sin.” 

EXAMINATION. 

Your rashness in making this assertion respecting 
the apostle Paul, is most excessive, for he “ confesses” 
no such thing ; neither does the passage alluded to 
in the foregoing article, afford the least apology for 
your error. For the wisdom of the flesh whereof 
the apostle speaketh, refers not to the incentive of 


1 Vide tom. 1. Conciliorum. ConciL Milevit. c. 2. ; et ibid. Concil. 
Arausican. 2. c. 2. 

2 Romans viii. 7. 


96 


white’s confutation 


sin, and its motions, which he acknowledges to be in 
himself and other holy men / but to the consent of the 
will unto that incentive or the evils suggested by it, 
to which all that is earthly and vicious in our nature 
is to be attributed. 

The wisdom of the flesh, considered in this sense, 
appertains to actual, not to original sin; and the 
apostle attributes it only to sinners, who follow what 
is earthly and walk according to the flesh. Here are 
his own words — ‘ For they that are according to the 
flesh, mind the things that are of the flesh : but they 
that are according to the spirit, mind the things that 
are of the spirit. For the wisdom of the flesh is 
death : but the wisdom of the spirit is life and peace. 
Because the wisdom of the flesh is an enemy to God : 
for it is not subject to the law of God, neither can it 
be. And they also who are in the flesh cannot please 
God. But you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, 
if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you/ &c . 2 * 
See the Commentaries of Chrysostom , 8 Remigius , 4 
Primasius , 5 and others, on this passage. 

In Divine Scripture the name of sin is given to 
many things, to which its nature is not communicated. 
Sacrifices for sins, are called sins . 6 And because 
Christ was a sacrifice for our sins, he is therefore 
said by God to be made sin for us . 7 After this man- 
ner concupiscence also is called sin in the regene- 
rated . 8 “ But it is called sin,” saith St. Augustin, “ in 
this sense, because it originated from sin, though now 
it. be not of itself sin in the regenerated. As the lan- 
guage which the tongue pronounceth, is called a 
tongue, and the writing which the hand executeth, is 
called a hand ? so in like manner concupiscence is 


i Romans vii. 2 Romans viii. 5, 6, 7, 8. 

s Chrysost. tom. 4. comment, in Rom. c. 8. Ser. 13. 

4 Tom. 5. Biblioth. Patrum, p. 5. Remig. Comment, in Rom. c. 8. 

s Tom. 6. Biblioth. Patrum, p. 2. Primasii comment, in Rom. c. 8. 

e Osee iv. 8. 7 2 Cor.'v. 21. 8 R om . v i. 12. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


97 


called sin, because if it prevail, sin is the conse- 
quence. Just as cold is called sluggish, not because it 
proceeds from the sluggish, but because it renders 
people sluggish.” And in the same place he says — 
“ Concupiscence of itself is not, indeed, a sin in the 
regenerated, so long as the will doth not yield its con- 
sent to illicit acts, and the mind, which possesses 
sovereignty over the members, suffer them to perpe- 
trate what is unlawful : so that, if that be not done 
which is written — ‘ Thou shalt not covet : n this at least 
may be done, which we read elsewhere — ‘ Thou 
shalt not go after thy concupiscences .’ i 2 But where- 
as, by a certain manner of speaking, concupiscence 
is called sin, because it originated from sin, and, if it 
prevail, makes us guilty of sin ; the wicked propen- 
sity arising therefrom, influences every person born 
into the world. This propensity, the grace of Christ, 
through the remission of all sins in the persons born 
again by baptism, doth not suffer to prevail, pro- 
vided we obey it not, when it may be said, in a cer- 
tain manner, to command us to commit evil deeds .” 3 
These are words of Augustin. And the Fathers of 
the Council of Trent define as follows : — “ This con- 
cupiscence, which the apostle sometimes calls sin, the 
holy Synod declares the Catholic Church never un- 
derstood to be called sin, in the sense in which sin 
really and properly exists in the regenerated; but 
that he so called it, because it comes of sin, and in- 
clines to sin. And if any person shall believe the 
reverse, let him be anathema .” 4 

The reason of the foregoing conclusion is, because 
whatsoever really hath the quality and nature of sin, 
is, in the regenerated, washed away by baptism, 
through the efficacy of which all sins are cancelled. 


i Exod. xx. 16, 17, & Rom. vii. 7. 2 Eccles. xviii. 30. 

3 August, tom. 7. Dc nuptiis et concupiscentia ad Valerium 

Comitem, lib. 1. c. 23. 

4 Concil. Trident, gess. 5. Decretum de peccato originali. 

9 


98 


white’s confutation 


This is evident from the words of the apostle — ‘ But 
ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are 
JUSTIFIED in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by 
the spirit of our God .’ 1 “ Baptism therefore,” says 
St. Augustin, “ wholly washeth away all sins of 
thought, word, and deed, whether original or actual ; 
whether through ignorance, or whether wittingly 
committed : but it doth not take away the infirmity 
which the Christian resisteth when he fights the good 
fight, &c .” 2 The same Augustin, refuting the follow- 
ing calumny of the Pelagians — ‘ They (the Catholics) 
also maintain, that baptism does not give full par- 
don of sins, or cancel crimes; but that it pares 
them down in such a manner, as to leave the root 
of every sin in the evil flesh’ — saith, “ Who but 
an infidel, would assert this in arguing against the 
Pelagians ? For we maintain, on the contrary, that 
baptism confers pardon of all sins, and that it cancels, 
not pares down, crimes ; that sins are not to be again 
and again cut down, as if their roots were retained in 
the corrupt flesh, as those of the hair when shaved, are 
in the head, that it may grow again .” 3 And disputing 
against Julian the Pelagian, he says — “ But you who 
imagine, that if concupiscence were an evil, he who is 
baptized w ould be free from it, are greatly in error. 
For he is free from all sin, not from all evil. To 
express myself more plainly, he is free from all the 
guilt of evil, not from all evil. For what is free from 
the corruption of the body? Or is it not evil that 
presseth down the soul? and was he in error who 
said — ‘ The corruptible body is a load upon the soul .’” 4 
These are the words of Augustin . 5 

1 1 Cor. vi. 11. 

2 August, tom. 7, contra duas cpistolas Pelagianorum ad Boni. 
facium, lib. 3. c. 3. 

3 August, torn. 7, contra duas epistolas Pelagianorum ad Bonifa- 
cium, lib. 1. c. 13. 

4 Wisdom ix. 15. 

5 August, tom. 7, adv. Julianum Pelagianum, lib. 6. c. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


99 


By baptism, therefore, all sins are taken away ; yet 
not all evils. For evil concupiscence, by which the 
flesh lusteth against the spirit , 1 and against which we 
must constantly war , 2 remains in the persons baptized. 
But although it remains, and allures to sin, yet so 
long as we do not consent to the evil, it is no sin. 
The apostle excuses the involuntary motions of con- 
cupiscence in the regenerated, saying — ‘ Now then it. 
is no more I that do it ; but sin that dwelleth in me . 3 
Again he saith, the things only ‘ which come forth 
from the heart’ (that is, which proceed from the will) 
‘ these defile a man .’ 4 And St. Augustin thus writes 
on the subject : — “ For in as much as appertains to us, 
we should always be without sin, until this evil become 
healed, by never yielding it our consent to commit 
any thing bad. And though we be not mortally, but 
venially overcome by this rebellious evil; yet by those 
things wherein we are overcome, we contract offences, 
for which we must daily say — ‘ Forgive us our tres- 
passes .’ 5 Again, considering the following passage of 
the Epistle of Saint James, the same Augustin re- 
marks : “ But when the apostle James saith — ‘ Every 
man is tempted, being drawn away by his own concu- 
piscence, and allured — Then when concupiscence hath 
conceived , it bringeth forth sin,’ 6 — he by these very 
words clearly distinguishes the thing brought forth , 
from that bringing it forth. For the thing bringing 
forth is concupiscence ; that brought forth is sin. But 
concupiscence does not bring forth, unless it shall 
have conceived ; it does not conceive, unless it shall 
have allured, that is, obtained the consent of the will 
to commit evil. The reason, therefore, why we must 
struggle against concupiscence is, in order to prevent 
its conceiving, and bringing forth sin .” 7 

l Galat. v. 17. 2 Rom. vi. 12. 3 Rom. vii. 17. 

4 Mat. xv. 18, 19. 

$ August, tom. 7. contra Julianum Pelagianum, lib. 2., versus finem. 

« James i. 14, 15. 

7 August, tom. 7, adversus Julianum Pelagianum, lib. 6. c. 5. 


100 


white’s confutation 


CHAPTER XIX. 

The Eleventh Article examined . 

The eleventh article, which is entitled “ Of the 
justification of Man,” is as follows — “We are ac- 
counted righteous before God, only for the merit of 
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not 
for our own works or deservings : Wherefore, that we 
are justified by faith only , is a most wholesome doc- 
trine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is 
expressed in the Homily of Justification.” 

EXAMINATION. 

This article of your creed embraces two errors con- 
trary to the Catholic Faith. The first, whereby you 
exclude all inherent justice in the cause of justifica- 
tion before God : the latter , whereby you assert that 
man is justified by faith “ alone.” 

With respect to your j first error, Catholics unani- 
mously teach the very reverse of it, namely, that the 
justification of man consists, not in the remission of 
sins only, but also in the sanctification and renovation 
of the inner man by the voluntary susception of 
grace and gifts, according to the hope of life everlast- 
ing. 1 — For besides the remission of sins, the charity 
of God is poured abroad in the hearts of the justified, 
by the Holy Ghost which is given to them . 2 The 
justified receive the spirit of adoption of sons, w r hereby 
they say, Abba , F ather ; 3 and they have given unto 
them by Christ, true Christian justice as the primitive 
robe, in lieu of that which Adam by his disobedience 
lost upon himself and us . 4 For although the justice of 
Christ, inherent in himself, be the meritorious cause 
of man’s justification ; yet its only formal cause is the 
justice of God, whereof Paul the apostle speaketh — 


1 Titus iii. 7. 

8 Romans viii. 15. 


2 Romans v. 5. 
4 Luke xv. 22. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDiSM. 


101 


not that justice by which God is just, but that where- 
by he renders us so. “ For if a man could do no 
justice for himself,” says St. Augustin, “ the apostle 
would not say of the Jews — ‘ They not knowing the 
justice of God, and seeking to establish their own, 
have not submitted themselves to the justice of God.’ 1 
— These, therefore, were they who understood not the 
bread descending from heaven ; for they, filled with 
their own justice, hungered not after the justice of 
God. What means, the justice of God, and the jus- 
tice of man? The justice of God is here called, not 
that by which God is just, but that which he giveth 
to man, that man may be just through God. But 
what was the justice of those who presumed upon 
their own strength, and spoke as if they were, of their 
own virtue, fulfillers of the law ? Whereas no one, 
indeed, fulfilleth the law, unless he be assisted by 
grace.” 2 

And they who walk according to the spirit, receive 
this grace of God, not in vain, but advancing from 
‘ virtue to virtue ;’ 3 and yielding their members to 
serve justice unto sanctification, 4 they increase in that 
justice received through the grace of Christ, faith co- 
operating with good works. For we are taught by 
God himself, that the justice of good works is true 
justice, as it is written — ‘ Little children, let no man 
deceive you. He that doth justice is just : as he also 
is just.’ 5 Again the scripture saith — he shall rest upon 
the Holy Mount, ‘ who entereth without stain, and 
worketh justice/ 6 And the Gospel again declares — 
* For not the hearers of the law are just before God, 
but the doers of the law shall be justified.’ 7 And St. 
Augustin saith — “ As the justice, according to which 
the just man liveth of faith, is given by God to man 


1 Rom. x. 3. 

2 August, tom. 9, exposit. in Evangel. Joan, tract. 26. 

« Psalm lxxxiii. 8. * Romans vi. 19. * 1 John iii. 7. 

« Psalm xiv. 1,2 ' Romans ii. 13. 

9* 


102 


WHITE S CONFUTATION 


through the spirit of grace, it is true justice; and 
although, considering the limited capacity of this life, 
it be not undeservedly called perfect in some just 
men, yet doth it fall far short of that eminent justice, 
whereof the angels are capable in their superior state. 
He who did not as yet possess this eminent justice, 
said he was perfect on account of that which he now 
had ; and at the same time imperfect because of that 
which he still wanted : but evidently the lesser justice 
produceth merit; the greater, reward. Wherefore 
he who doth not seek the former, obtaineth not the 
latter.” 1 * 

The second error contained in this article, is the 
absurd doctrine of the Solifidians, which you hold as 
“ a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of com- 
fort,” though God plainly teaches the very reverse 
in his sacred word. The apostle James saith — ‘ Do 
you see, that by works a man is justified ; and not by 
faith only .’ 2 In addition to faith, penance is required 
unto justification. For we read in Isaias — ‘Wash 
yourselves, be clean, take away the evil of your de- 
vices from mine eyes : cease to do perversely.’ — 
And again in Luke : — ■ No, I say to you : but unless 
you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish.’ 3 
According to the doctrine taught by Christ himself, 
baptism is required unto justification : — ■* Jesus an- 
swered : Amen, amen, I say to thee, except a man 
be born again of water, and of the Holy Ghost, he can- 
not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.’ 4 After Christ, 
Peter the prince of apostles, taught the same doc- 
trine : — ‘ But Peter said unto them, Do penance, and 
be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus 
Christ, for the remission of your sins.’ 5 And the 
words of the Catholic Church in the creed of Con- 


1 August, tom. 7. contra duas epistolas Pelagianorum ad Boni- 
facium, lib. 3. c. 7. 

2 James ii. 24 . 8 Isaias i. 16, &, c. ; and Luke xiii. 3, 5. 

4 John iii. 5. * Acts ii. 38. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLAN’DISM. 


103 


stantinople, are — “ I confess one baptism for the 
remission of sins.” Moreover, the Scripture assures 
us, that they who wee justified, are also glorified . 1 But 
\ye read in the first Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corin- 
thians, that they who are involved in mortal sin shall 
not inherit the glory of God . 2 Now if man be justi- 
fied by faith “ alone,” many people (what an absurd- 
ity !) involved in the guilt of mortal sin, are both justi- 
fied and glorified. For though mortal sin deprive 
the faithful of living faith ; yet it doth not take away 
the true faith, which, although it cannot avail, yet 
can exist, without charity. In fine, this doctrine 
very closely borders on the Eunomian heresy, which 
St. Augustin enumerates among the others, in his 
sixth volume on heresies . 3 

We now conclude this chapter with the following 
brief observation : — As often as a good Catholic per- 
formeth any good work, lest he should be found 
ungrateful, he calls to mind the munificence of Him 
who gives ; and whilst he daily prayeth : ‘ Forgive us 
our trespasses / 4 lest he should become proud, he also 
calleth to mind the mercy of Him whose pleasure it 
is to pardon. 


CHAPTER XX. 

The Thirteenth Article examined. 

This Article, which is entitled “ Of Works before 
Justification,” is as followeth— “ Works done before 
the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of his Spirit, 
are not pleasant to God, for as much as they spring 
not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make 
men meet to receive grace, or (as the School Authors 
say) deserve grace of congruity : yea, rather for that 

i Romans viii. 30. 2 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. 

8 Vide August, tom. 6, lib. de hseres. ad Quodvultdeum, haeres. 54. 

* Mat. vi. 12, and Luke xi. 4. 


104 


white’s confutation 


they are not done as God hath willed and commanded 
them to be done,i£e doubt not but they have the nature 
of sin.” 

EXAMINATION. 

Since Catholic school-authors acknowledge the 
Council of Trent to be a true and legitimate Council, 
they do not presume to teach any thing contrary to 
its doctrine. And as Bellarmine, in his reply to 
Kemnitius, a Lutheran, who would fain derogate from 
the Council of Trent, rightly observes — “Not only 
doth this council nowhere approve of merit of con- 
gruity, but it even rejects it ; because it belongs to 
works done of the force of nature alone, as is manifest 
from the sixth session, chapters 5. & 6., canons 1. 2. 3. 
For it teacheth, that the beginning of justification is 
derived from prevenient grace ; that the dispositions 
to justifying grace commence, when man, moved and 
assisted by God, begins to believe ; and that no one, 
unaided by the grace of God, can, by the force of 
nature, or knowledge of the law, believe in God, love 
him, or do penance,” &C. 1 These are the words of 
Bellarmine. 

But you are justly reprehensible for teaching in this 
article, as a matter of faith, that all works done before 
the grace and faith of Christ are sins. For though 
Catholics believe, 2 that works of this nature are not 
so pleasing to God, as to conciliate his friendship, or 
be reckoned among the works He wished and com- 
manded to be done, in order to obtain justice and 
salvation in Christ : yet they invariably teach — that 
all the principles of good are not so entirely eradicat- 
ed, as that our free will, without the assistance of the 
grace of Christ, can effect nothing but sin. For there 
are many useful things which the free will hath pro- 
duced, from what still remains of its original excel- 
lence. Some of these are advantageous for human 


i Bellarminus tom. 4. lib. 1. ‘De Justificatione,’ e. 21. 
3 Tom. 1. Conciliorum. Conoil. Arausican. 2. c. 6, 7. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


105 


purposes ; others praiseworthy, as being calculated to 
polish and refine the manners of life ; and others, 
founded on industry and practical wisdom, are adapted 
for the establishing of governments : and these things, 
in as much as they are good of themselves, and pro- 
ductive of good to mankind, can in no wise be rightly 
accounted sins. 

St. Augustin, considering the fourteenth verse of 
the second chapter of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, 
saith — “ But though they who naturally do the things 
that are of the law, are not as yet to be reckoned 
within the number of those whom the grace of Christ 
justifieth, but rather among the impious, who do not 
properly worship the true God ; still we either read, 
or know, or hear, of some acts of theirs, which, ac- 
cording to the standard of justice, so far from merit- 
ing censure, deservedly call forth our applause. If 
we, however, discuss the end for which these acts are 
performed, they will not be found to merit the praise 
or vindication due to justice.” And in the same work, 
chapter 28, he says — “ Nevertheless, as the image of 
God, impressed on the human soul, is not so effaced 
by the stain of earthly affections, as to leave on it no 
traces, whereby it may deservedly be said, even in 
the very impiety of life, to do or know some of the 
things which the law prescribes” — &c. And a little 
further on he thus writes — “ For they (the Jews) also 
were men, and the force of nature was in them, 
whereby the rational soul both knoweth and doth that 
which is lawful.” — And again he saith — “ For as 
venial sins, without which this life is not spent, do not 
preclude the just man from eternal life; so good 
works, without some of which the life of the most 
wicked is scarcely found, avail not the impious to 
eternal salvation.” 1 2 

And in another work, the same St. Augustin, treat- 


i August, tom. 3., lib. ‘ De spiritu et litera ad Marcellinum,’ c. 27, 

2 8 . 


106 


white’s confutation 


ing of the temporal reward with which God recom- 
pensed the good conduct of the Romans, thus writes : 
— “ As God was not to give them eternal life with his 
holy Angels in heaven, attainable by true piety, which 
pays only to the one true God, that religious homage, 
called by the Greeks latria ; had he not bestowed on 
them the temporal glory of supreme dominion, they 
would not have received the reward of their good 
acts, thatmeansj the virtues by which they endeavoured 
to arrive at so great glory. For of such as are seen 
to do good, that they may receive glory from men, 
the Lord saith — ‘ Amen I say to you, they have re- 
ceived their reward .’ 1 Thus the Romans sacrificed 
their private interests for the good of the common 
weal, that is, for the Republic and its treasury — they 
resisted avarice — generously consulted for their coun- 
try — and were not prone either to crime, or lust, ac- 
cording to their laws. By all these practices and 
observances, as by the true road, they struggled to 
honours, empire, and glory. They are honoured in 
almost every country ; they have imposed their laws 
upon many nations ; and are to-day renowned in the 
writings and history of almost every people. They 
have no reason to complain of the justice of the su- 
preme and true God : they have received their re- 
ward .” 2 So far Augustin. 

St. Jerom, considering the following words of the 
Apostle — ‘To reveal his Son in me ; ’ 3 saith : — “Where- 
fore it is manifest, that the knowledge of God is by 
nature implanted in all, and that no one is born with- 
out Christ; but that all have within them the seeds of 
wisdom, justice, and the other virtues. Consequently, 
many persons, without the faith and Gospel of Christ, 
act wisely and holily in some respects — such as obey- 
ing parents, relieving the indigent, not oppressing 
their neighbours, or plundering the property of others : 

1 Mat. vi. 5. 2 August, tom. 5. ‘ De civitate Dei,’ lib. 5. c. 15. 

9 Galat. i. 16. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


107 


and these become more obnoxious to the judgment of 
God, because, having within them virtuous principles 
and the seeds of God, they do not believe in Him, 
without whom they cannot exist.” 1 See the same St. 
Jerom, vol. 5th, book 9th, commentary on Ezech. c. 
29. And he who is desirous of seeing additional tes- 
timonies in confirmation of the forementioned doctrine, 
can refer to Basil, Chrysostom, Prosperus, Gregory 
the First, and others whose testimonies are adduced 
by scholastic Doctors. 2 

Moreover, who would be prudent in asserting, that 
Pharaoh (as we read) Gen. c. xii., and Abemelech, 
Gen. c. xx., sinned by surrendering Sarah to Abraham, 
affording him a safe-conduct, and enriching him with 
gifts 1 What is said of these, can also be said of the 
mid wives who feared God, Exodus c. 1.; and of Cyrus 
and Darius, who ordered the temple of Jerusalem to 
be rebuilt, 1 Esdras chapters 1 & 6. The same can 
also be said respecting Assuerus, who exalted Mardo- 
chceus, Esther c. G. ; whilst, on the other hand, Aman 
was justly executed at his command, Esther c. 7* Add 
to these instances, the following with which the New 
Testament supplies us — that Servius Paulus was de- 
sirous of hearing the word of God, Acts c. 13.; that 
the Barbarians showed no small courtesy to Paul the 
Apostle, and his shipwrecked companions, Actsc. 
xxviii. These and numerous other testimonies of the 
same kind, respecting the works of unbelievers, can 
be produced from the Holy Scriptures ; and we there- 
in read, how some of these works are praised, others 
rewarded by God — what can never be asserted with 
respect to His dealings concerning works that are of 
a sinful nature. 

Finally, profane history every where abounds with 

1 Hieron. tom. 9. lib. 1. comment in Galat. c. 1. 

2 Vide Basilium in Hexameron Divini opificii, homil. 9.; Chrysost. 
tom. 5. homil. 67. ad populum Antiochenum ; Prosperum de vocatione 
Gentium, lib. 1. c. 4.; Gregorium 1. Papam, homil. 27. in Evangelia, 


108 


white’s confutation 


instances of unbelievers, who, influenced by natural 
commiseration, distribute alms to the needy ; or, act- 
ing in obedience to the dictates of reason, faithfully 
discharge their obligations, honour their parents, obey 
the superior powers : and for such acts, they do not 
deserve punishment, neither do they become worse 
because they perform them. Unbelievers, therefore, 
do not, by their good works , commit sin ; for man de- 
serves punishment on account of sin , and is made worse 
hy every sin he commits. 


CHAPTER XXI. 

The fourteenth Article examined . 

This article, which is entitled — “ Of works of Super- 
erogation,” — is as follows: — “ Voluntary works be- 
sides, over and above Cod’s commandments, which 
they (the Schoolmen) call works of supererogation, 
cannot be taught without arrogance and impiety : for 
by them men do declare, that they do not only render 
unto God as much as they are bound to do, but that 
they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is 
required: Whereas, Christ saith plainly — When ye 
have done all that are commanded to you, say, we are 
unprofitable servants.” 

The Fathers and Doctors of the primitive church, 
whom even you esteem as learned and holy men, 
unanimously teach that the Holy Ghost, in the sacred 
Scriptures, advises many things to be done over and 
above what are commanded ; which, if done, will be 
entitled to a rich reward; if not, no punishment 
follows their omission : and these things, Divines call 
works of evangelical counsel, or supererogation . 1 


1 Sylvius in lib. 2. q. 1 08. a. 4. — Observandum est, quod cum de 
consiliis, aut evangelicis aut alioquin perfectionis agitur ; consilium 
describi possit esse opus bonum a Deo non imperatum, scd demon, 
stratum et commendatum ; cui, si fiat, magna debetur remuneratio ; 
si non fiat, nulla psena. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


109 


And in teaching this doctrine with the church, against 
Innovators, the fathers and doctors do rightly : for as 
the apostle St. Jude saith, ‘ They contend earnestly 
for the faith once delivered to the saints.’ 1 But I 
leave others to judge of the wickedness of your con- 
duct, in not only renouncing this doctrine, but also 
in accusing of impiety and arrogance, those who 
teach it. 

That this is, indeed, the doctrine of the fathers and 
doctors of the primitive church, the following testimo- 
nies clearly demonstrate. St. Chrysostom, consider- 
ing these words of the apostle Paul — ■* For if I preach 
the Gospel, it is no glory to me,’ &c., 2 saith : “ Paul, 
pray explain the meaning of what you speak? If 
you preach the Gospel it is no glory to you, but if 
you deliver it without charge ? Is therefore the latter 
greater than the former ? By no means: because the 
former is indeed a precept : but the latter a voluntary 
act. According to these words then, whatever is done 
over and above the commandment obtains a high re- 
ward ; but that which is enjoined by it, does not 
obtain this reward. Wherefore, St. Paul decides that 
the latter is greater than the former — but not from 
the nature of the thing itself. For what can be com- 
pared with preaching the Gospel ? Preaching makes 
us vie with the very angels. Yet as the one is indeed 
a precept and obligatory, the other a freewill offering, 
consequently the latter is greater than the former.” 3 

In another volume of his works, St. Chrysostom 
says : “You can then by no means make complaint 
of our Lord. He requireth not impossibilities; for 
many do over and above what is commanded. If 
then they were impossibilities, persons could not of 
their own accord supererogate by leading the life of 
virginity. God nowhere commands that we should 
not possess property, yet many strip themselves of 


i Jude v. 3. 2 1 Cor. ix. 16. 

s Chrysost. tom. 4. comment, in 1 Cor. c. ix., homil. 22. 


10 


110 


white’s confutation 


their own substance — testifying by their works, how 
very easy it is to fulfil the laws of the commandments. 
For had they not proved the commandments to be 
mild, men could not do over and above what is enjoin- 
ed by them. The Lord did not impose a command- 
ment respecting virginity — for a commandment im- 
plies both the necessity and the mill ; but he who giveth 
the counsel, left man the master of his own free will. 
Wherefore, St. Paul saith, — ‘Now concerning virgins, 
I have no commandment ; but I give counsel .’ 1 Do 
you perceive that in this case, not a precept, but a 
counsel is given ? Do you see how the apostle doth 
not command, but admonish ? The one, saith he, is 
obligatory , the other voluntary : I give not, saith the 
apostle, a commandment, lest I burden : I admonish 
and give counsel, that I may entice.” And immedi- 
ately after, St. Chrysostom again says : — “ Do you 
see how the lawgiver spareth us ? How solicitous he 
is for our salvation ? Could he not impose this as a 
commandment, and say ‘ They who lead a life of 
virginity, shall be honoured : and they who do not 
shall be punished V But this would have burdened 
our nature : he therefore spares it. He dispensed with 
extra zeal, he dispensed witli virginity superior to the 
conflicts of passion, in order that they who practise 
and excel in it may display their magnanimity ; and 
that they who do not, may be still deemed worthy 
the indulgence of the Lord. Respecting poverty 
likewise, he did not impose a commandment, and 
simply say — ‘ Sell what thou hast but — ‘ If thou 
wilt be perfect , go, sell what thou hast .’ 2 It rests 
with your own free will ; you shall be master of your 
own counsel ; I do not compel, I do not burden you : 
but I will place a crown upon him who followeth my 
counsel ; upon him who doth not, I inflict no punish- 
ment. The reason is, because the things which we 
are commanded or obliged to do, obtain no such 


i 1 Cor. vii. 25. 


2 Mat. xix. 21. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


Ill 


reward; but what are meritoriously, and freely done, 
these are recompensed with splendid crowns. And 
in support of these facts, I will now produce St. Paul 
as a witness : — ‘ If I preach the Gospel,' saith the 
apostle, ‘ it is no glory to me.’ Why ? — Because a 

* necessity lieth upon me. For wo is unto me, if I 
preach not the Gospel .’ 1 You see then that he who 
fulfilleth the laws hath not much reward, for a neces- 
sity lieth upon him : but he who fulfilleth them not, 
shall be exposed to punishment and vengeance. ‘ For 
wo is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel.’ But with 
regard to what we do of our own free will, it is not 
so, and why? What then is my reward? That, 
preaching the Gospel, I may deliver the Gospel of 
Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power. 
In the former case, the law compelled him to preach 
the Gospel ; wherefore he had not much reward : in 
the latter, he resolved to deliver it ‘ without charge,’ 
for this he had much reward .” 2 

Theodoret, explaining these words of the Psalm : — 

* The free offerings of my mouth make acceptable, O 
Lord,’ saith — “ The Divine laws ordain many vir- 
tuous duties, but the free will adds others. So of 
sacrifices likewise, some are prescribed by the law ; 
others proceed from the free will. The law com- 
manded that, for sin, crime, and expiation, the former 
should be offered, as the payment of a certain debt 
due to God ; but to the latter, offered of the liberality 
of the mind, he gave the appellation of gifts. In like 
manner, the precepts of the Gospel now enjoin tem- 
perance, and justice : but virginity, continence after 
marriage, poverty, a solitary life, and living as a 
hermit, are works of the mind, which are over and 
above what is required by the law. Such offerings, 
therefore, the Prophet called voluntary. For to that 
which is not subject to the necessity of the law, but is 


1 1 Cor. ix. 16. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 5, ‘ De Poenitentia,’ homil. 8. 


112 


white’s confutation 


the fruit of a pious and religious mind, the term volun- 
tary is justly applied.” 1 

St. Cyprian, discoursing on holy virginity, says : — 
“ As the world is now densely peopled, let those who 
can observe continence, living after the manner of 
eunuchs, become eunuchs for the Kingdom’s sake. 
The Lord doth not command this, but he exhorteth 
us to it. He imposeth not the yoke of necessity, in 
order that the choice of the will may be left free. 
But when he saith — ‘ In my Father’s house, there are 
many mansions,’ 2 3 he thereby plainly indicates the 
existence of a superior order of dwellings. You (vir- 
gins) are seeking those preferable mansions, and by 
a mortification of the desires of the flesh, are trea- 
suring up in heaven the reward of a superior grace.” 8 

St. Ambrose, speaking of the glory of virginity, 
saith : “ With what reverence did the blessed apostle 
speak of virginity ! ‘ Now concerning virgins, I have 
no commandment of the Lord ; but I give counsel, 
as having obtained mercy of the Lord.’ 4 A command- 
ment he hath not ; he hath a counsel. For, to do 
that which is over and above the law, we are not 
compelled by precept, but are rather persuaded by 
counsel. The authority is not presumed, but the grace 
is manifested : yet not by every one, but by him who 
hath deserved the mercy of God. Are then the 
counsels of these men better than those of the apos- 
tles ?” 5 Again, showing the difference between a 
precept and a counsel, he says : “ That you may un- 
derstand in what a precept differs from a counsel, 
remember the young man, to whom it is first pre- 
scribed in the Gospel — ‘ Thou shalt do no murder’ — 
4 Thou shalt not commit adultery’ — ‘ Thou shalt not 


1 Theod. tom. 1., interpret. Ps. cxviii. 108. 

2 John xiv. 2. 

3 Cyprianus lib. de discipline et habuit. virginum in fine. 

1 Cor. vii. 25. 

* Ambros. tom. 3., epiet. 82. yercellensi ecclesi®. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


113 


bear false witness.’ 1 For a precept is contained, where 
the punishment for sin is attached. But when the 
young man replied, that he had fulfilled the command- 
ments of the law, a counsel is given him to sell all 
that he had, and fallow the Lord. 2 For the latter is 
not enjoined by precept, but given by way of coun- 
sel.” 3 

St. Jerom says : “ When a counsel is given, the will 
is left free ; when a precept , strict compliance is re- 
quired. 4 1 have no precept of the Lord,’ saith St. 
Paul ; 4 but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy 
of the Lord.’ 4 If thou hast no commandment of the 
Lord; why presumest thou to give a counsel, for 
which thou hast no order ? The apostle will reply to 
me : 4 Wilt thou have me to enforce that which the 
Lord rather offered as a favour, than imposed as a 
commandment? He, the Creator and potter, know- 
ing the fragile nature of the vessel which he moulded, 
left virginity to man’s option ; and shall I the teacher 
of the Gentiles, 4 who have become all things to all 
men, that I might gain all,’ 5 shall I at once impose 
the yoke of perpetual chastity on the necks of infirm 
believers ? — Our Lord being tempted by the Pharisees, 
and asked whether according to the Mosaic law, it 
was allowable for men to put away their wives, posi- 
tively forbad it. Upon considering which, his disci- 
ples said to him : — 4 If the case of a man with his 
wife be so, it is not good to marry.’ To this our Lord 
replied as follows : — 4 All men receive not this word, 
but they to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs, 
who were born so from their mother’s womb : and 
there are eunuchs, who were made so by men ; 
and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves 
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that 
can receive it, let him receive it.’ 6 Hence it is evi- 


l Mat. xix. 18, Sec. 2 Mat. xix. 21. 

8 Ambros. tom. 1., lib. de viduis, versus finem. 

4 1 Cor. vii. 25. « 1 Cor. ix. 19, &c. * Mat. xix. 10, 11, 12. 

10 * 


114 


white’s confutation 


dent why the apostle said — 4 Now concerning virgins 
I have no commandment of the Lord for our Lord 
had previously said : 4 All men receive not this word, 
but they to whom it is given : and he that can receive 
it, let him receive it. Our Lord proposes a reward 
( ayavodt'tw,) he invites to the course, he holds in his 
hand the prize for virginity, points to the pure foun- 
tain, and cries out : 4 He that thirsts, let him come and 
drink — He that can receive it, let him receive it.’ 
He does not say, willing or unwilling, you must drink 
— you must run. But he who wishes, he who is able 
to run, and to drink, let him : whoever conquers shall 
be satiated. And Christ bears the greater love to 
virgins for this reason ; because they grant, of their 
own free will, that which is not required of them by 
any commandment. And it is a greater favour to 
make a present of what you do not owe, than to pay 
that which you are obliged.” A little further on, St. 
Jerom again says : “ I am well pleased with those 
who remain virgins, not from necessity, but of their 
own free will. I joyfully receive into my bosom, 
those, 4 who have made themselves eunuchs for the 
kingdom of heaven’s sake who for love of me, 
would not remain what they were.” And in the same 
work, treating of the following verse of Scripture — 
4 Who have made themselves eunuchs for the king- 
dom of heaven’s sake,’ he again saith : 44 If they who 
lived in virginity have the reward of the kingdom of 
heaven, it therefore follows that they who have not 
led a life of virginity, cannot receive the place of 
those who have. 4 He that can receive it,’ saith the 
Lord, 4 let him receive it.’ It requires great faith, and 
superior virtue, to be God’s purest temple ; to offer 
oneself an entire holocaust to the Lord ; and as Saint 
Paul saith, to be 4 holy, both in body and in spirit .’ 1 
These are the true eunuchs, who, regarding them- 
selves as parched wood, on account of their sterility, 
hear through the voice of Isaias , 2 that they shall 


i 1 Cor. vii. 24. 


2 Isaias lvi. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


115 


possess in heaven the place prepared for sons and 
daughters.” 1 

Again, the same St. Jerom says — “ Why has he 
not a precept of the Lord concerning virginity ? be- 
cause that which is not forced, but freely offered, is 
entitled to a greater reward. For had virginity been 
enforced by a commandment, marriage would, as far 
as we can see, have been abolished. And it would 
have been most cruel to force man contrary to his 
nature — to require from man the life of an angel — and 
in a manner to condemn that which had been divinely 
instituted.” 2 Finally, considering these words of the 
apostle — ‘ Trusting in thy obedience, I have written 
to thee : knowing that thou wilt also do more than I 
say,’ 3 he adds : “ Wherefore, Philemon is deservedly 
praised by the apostle ; for by his works he exceeds 
the commandments, and can exclaim : ‘ Accept, I be- 
seech thee, the freewill offerings of my mouth, O 
Lord.’ 4 He, by doing more than was commanded, 
shall rise above those who have only done what was 
required of them, and who are ordered to say : ‘We 
are unprofitable servants ; we have done that which 
we ought to do.’ 5 Virginity is crowned with a greater 
reward, for this reason also — because it is enjoined by 
no precept of the Lord ; and it soars above what is 
required by the commandments.” 6 

St. Augustin, in his epistle to St. Hilary, explaining 
these words of the Gospel : ‘ If thou wilt be perfect, 
go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou 
shalt have treasure in heaven,’ 7 says: “ Yet the good 
master distinguished between the precepts of the law, 
and this more excellent perfection. For in the former 
case he said : ‘ If thou wilt enter into life, keep the 


1 Hieron. tom. 3. lib. 1 . adv. jovinianum. 

2 Hieron. tom. 1., epist. ad Eustochium de custodia virginitatis. 

s Philem. v. 21. 4 p s . cxviii. 108. 5 Luke xvii. 10. 

« Hieron. tom. 9.. comment in epist. ad Philemon. 

S' Mat. xix. 21. 


116 


white’s confutation 

commandments but in the latter , — ‘ If thou wilt be 
perfect , go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, 
and thou shalt. have treasure in heaven. , ’ Towards 
the end of this epistle he again says — “ I who write 
these things, vehemently loved the perfection of which 
oui Lord spoke, when he said to the rich young man : 

* Go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and 
thou shalt have treasure in heaven ; and come, follow 
me.’ And I did so, not of my own strength, but by 
the assistance of the grace of Christ. Neither, be- 
cause I had not riches, will my recompense be the 
less. For the Apostles themselves, who did so before 
me, were not rich. And he parts with the whole 
world, who parts with what he hath, and what he 
desires to have. How far 1 have advanced in this 
road of perfection, I indeed know better than any 
other man; but God better than I. With all my 
strength, I exhort others to form this resolution ; and 
in the name of the Lord I have companions, who, 
through my ministry, have been persuaded to do in 
like manner.” 1 

This holy and learned father, showing elsewhere 
the difference between precepts and counsels, saith — - 
“ Whosoever doth not obey a precept, is guilty, and 
is deserving of punishment. Hence, because marriage 
is no sin (for if it were a sin, it would be forbidden 
by a commandment), there is no commandment of 
the Lord concerning virgins. But as it is by avoid- 
ing sins, or by obtaining the remission of them, that 
w r e are to attain to eternal life, in which state there 
is a certain eminent glory, not the portion of all who 
are to be saved, but of particular souls only ; and 
whereas it doth not suffice for the acquisition of this 
eminent glory, to be free from sin, unless there be 
made to the Redeemer a certain vow, which it is no 
sin not to have made, but to have made and redeemed 
is meritorious — therefore doth the Apostle say : i I 


1 August, tom. 2., epist. 89. ad Hilarium, versus finem. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 117 

give a counsel, as having obtained mercy of the Lord, 
to be faithful .’ 1 For I who am not faithful, by my 
own merits, but through the mercy of God, should 
not despise a faithful counsel. I think, therefore, 
that this is good for the present necessity. For I 
know that the urgent business of the present life to 
which the married are slaves, prevents them from 
meditating on what belongs to God, as much as is 
necessary for obtaining that glory, which will not be 
the portion of all the elect. ‘ For star differeth from 
star in glory : So also is the resurrection of the 
dead .’* 2 And in the thirtieth chapter, Augustin 
says: “ For it cannot be said, thou shalt not marry, 
in the same manner as it is said, thou shalt not com- 
mit adultery, thou shalt not kill. The latter are 
obligatory , the former is optional. They who ob- 
serve the former are honoured; such as do not 
observe the latter are condemned. In the latter, the 
Lord demands a debt from you ; in the former, what- 
soever you spend over and above, he will repay you 
on his return . 3 Reflect on the following words of the 
sacred volume — ‘ Within his walls, he will give a 
place, and a name much better than of sons and 
daughters .’ 4 Meditate on this eternal name. Who 
is there that explains what this name shall be? Yet 
whatever it be, it will be eternal. By believing, hop- 
ing, and delighting in this reward, the single could 
abstain from marriage, and the married live in conti- 
nence .” 5 

Finally, the same St. Augustin says : “ In the Gos- 
pel, our Lord hath not given us a counsel, but a com- 
mandment, to love our enemies. A counsel is one 
thing, a commandment another. A counsel is given 
us, to preserve virginity, to abstain from wine and 
flesh, to sell all things, and give to the poor. But a 

i 1 Cor. vii. 25. 2 1 Cor. xv. 41, 42. 

3 Luke x. 35. 4 Isaias Ivi. 5. 

* August, tom. 6, lib. de Sancta virginitate c. 14 & 30. 


118 


white’s confutation 


commandment is given us, to practise justice, to turn 
away from evil, and to do good. In a word, respect- 
ing virginity it is said — ‘ He that can receive it, let 
him receive it . 1 Whereas, respecting justice it is not 
said — He that can receive it, let him receive it ; but 
— •* Every tree that doth not yield good fruit, shall be 
cut down and cast into the fire .’ 2 He who willingly 
hears and obeys a counsel, shall enjoy a superior de- 
gree of glory ; but he who doth not fulfil a command- 
ment, cannot possibly escape punishment — unless he 
be relieved from it by means of penance .” 3 These 
are the words of the great Augustin. 

The testimonies already adduced, clearly demon- 
strate how widely you err from the truth of the Ca- 
tholic church respecting Evangelical counsels and 
perfection. Now, in reply to the argument advanced 
by you in support of this error, we answer : That 
God in his bounty was unwilling to require of us all 
that in justice he could require, or even as much as 
we could do ; but that he gave us a mild law, which, 
aided by his grace, we could discharge , 4 and to which, 
by means of the same divine grace, we could even 
superadd . 5 If therefore, the benefits conferred on us 
by God be taken into account, we can never render 
him an equivalent, much less supererogate by our 
works. But if we consider the mild law laid upon 
us, we can, with the assistance of His grace, do more 
than he by this law requires, and consequently we can 
fulfil his counsels also. 


l Mat. xix. 18. a Mat. iii. 10. 

8 Aug. tom. 10, De Tempore, Ser. 61. 

See Ezech. xxxvi. 25, 26, 27, &c. ; Mat.vii. 21, 24. ; xi. 29, 30. ; 
and xix. 17. Also John xiv. 21., and v. 23. Also 1 John v. 2, 3. &, 
Ps. cxviii. 32. See likewise August, tom. 4. lib. de Catechizandis 
rudibus, c. 23. ; & tom. 7. lib. de natura et gratia ad Timasium et 
Jacobum contra Pelagianos, c. 69.; & tom. 1. Conciliorum, concil. 
Arausican 2. c. 25. ; et concilium^ Trident, sess. 6. de justificationc, 
c. 11. 

s Mat. xix. 12. & v. 21. ; 2 Cor. vii. 25. ; & August, tom. 4. lib. 2., 
qusest. evangel., c. 19.; & tom. 6. lib. 1. de adulterinis conjugiis ad 
Pollentium, c. 14.; atque etiam testimonia supra citata. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


119 


In support of the article now under consideration, 
you quote the tenth verse of the seventeenth chapter 
of Saint Luke — ‘ When you shall have done all these 
things that are commanded you, say: We are unpro- 
fitable servants.’ This scriptural quotation contains 
nothing in favour of your error ; but, on the contrary, 
the erroneous interpretation you put upon this text, is 
refuted by the sense in which Catholics have always 
received it. We shall begin with the authority of St. 
Ambrose, who, when considering this passage, rea- 
sons thus : — “Wherefore, they who fulfil the command- 
ments can say : W e are unprofitable servants ; we 
have done that which we ought to do . 1 This the 
virgin does not say, he who sold his possessions does 
not say this ; but expects as it were the rewards 
which he stored up, like the Blessed Apostle who saith, 
* Behold, we have left all things, and have followed 
thee : what therefore shall we have V 2 He did not, 
like an unprofitable servant, say, he had done that 
which he ought to do ; but as one profitable to the 
Lord — as one who multiplied the talents committed 
to him by the interest he acquired — who is confident 
within himself, and sure of his merits, he expects the 
reward of faith and virtue .” 3 St. Augustin, also, 
argues far differently from what you do: “ The bur- 
den imposed upon virgins,” saith he, “ is not great : 
the greater love imposed the greater burden. That 
which was lawful, virgins would not, the more to 
please Him, to whom they had devoted themselves. 
They aimed at that superior excellence, which is after 
God’s own heart. What dost Thou order ? As if 
they were to say — What dost Thou order? Dost 
Thou command us not to commit adultery? For love 
of Thee, we do more than Thou commandest .” 1 

Moreover, as St. Chrysostom, when treating of 

i Luke xvii. 10. f 2 Mat. xix. 27. 

3 Ambros. tom. 1. lib. de viduis, versus finem. 

August, tom. 10. de verbis apostoli, sermo 18., versus finem. 


120 


white’s confutation 


these words of Isaias, — ‘ I saw the Lord,’ &c., rightly 
observes, Christ does not, in the passage alluded to 
(Luke xvii. 10), reprove his apostles for believing 
that they could fulfil his precepts ; but to such as prac- 
tise humility, he commends his will, and guards thorn 
against arrogance. “ Is arrogance,” asks St. Chry- 
sostom, “which causes man to forget himself, and 
which, after his protracted labours, consumes the trea- 
sures of virtue, an insignificant evil ? All other evils, 
indeed, are wont to flow from negligence of conduct, 
but this springs from our virtuous actions. For unless 
we be active and vigilant, nothing begets pride so 
much as a good conscience. Wherefore, Christ, know- 
ing that after our good acts this disease attacks us, 
said to his disciples, ‘ When you shall have done all 
these things that are commanded you, say: We are 
unprofitable servants.’ 1 When this noxious beast at- 
tempts to invade you, saith our Lord, shut it out by 
the virtue of these words. He did not say — When 
you shall have done all the things that are command- 
ed, you are unprofitable servants: but say ye: ‘We are 
unprofitable.’ Say so, lest you should have cause 
so fear: it is not according to your judgment that I 
pass sentence. For if you pronounce yourselves un- 
profitable, I will crown you as profitable.”* These 
arfe the words of Chrysostom. 

But it is to be observed, that, when, by the Divine 
grace, we fulfil God’s commandments and counsels, 
though we be profitable to ourselves and our neigh- 
bours ; yet, strictly speaking, we cannot be so to God. 
“Let the Lord,” saith St. Augustin, “possess thee, that 
thou mayest possess him : thou shalt be his inheritance, 
and his habitation. He possesseth, that he may profit ; 
he is possessed that he may profit. Can you profit him 
in anywise? ‘For I said to the Lord, thou art my God, 

1 Luke xvii. 10. 

6 Chrysost. tom. 1. de verbis Isai®, c. 6. Vidi Dominum, See. 
homil. 3. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


121 


since thou dost not stand in need of my benefits .” 1 Fi- 
nally, although Catholics teach that we are able, and are 
bound to do what God in his commandments requires 
as the terms upon which we are to be saved ; and al- 
though, with the apostle Paul, they exhort us to labour 
by good works to ‘ make our calling and election 
sure :’ 2 yet no one of them boasts that he himself has 
fulfilled the law, or places his chief reliance on its 
observance, or teaches others to do so. For Catholics 
know and teach, that every one of our works is to be 
scrutinized, not by a human, but a Divine judge : 3 and 
therefore they have a holy fear, lest any crime lurk 
within them, for which the anger of God (whom they 
that walk according to the flesh cannot please) might 
await them. Hence the just Job feared all his works, 
lest he might unconsciously offend God, who he knew 
would not spare the offender . 4 Jeremias testifies that 
the heart of man is searchable by God alone . 5 The 
apostle Paul, conscious to himself of no unfaithful dis- 
pensation, doth not dare with certainty to pronounce 
himself a faithful and justified dispenser . 6 For he had 
read : ‘ Who can understand his faults ? From my 
secret ones cleanse me, O Lord .’ 7 And he had also 
read the following passage : * There is a way which 
seemeth just unto a man : but the ends thereof lead 
to death . 8 And again : — ‘ Every way of a man seem- 
eth right to himself : but the Lord weigheth the 
hearts .’ 9 Wherefore the apostle moderated his opi- 
nion of himself, lest he might, perchance, have offended 
t-hrough ignorance. 

From these and like considerations, Catholics, even 
the most holy and learned among them, walk with 
humility and a pious fear — often repeating : ‘ Enter 


i August, tom. 8. Enarrat. in Psal. 34., concio prima, de prima 

p. Psalmi ; & Psal. xv. 2., & Job xxii. 3. 2 2 Peter i. 10. 

3 Concil. Trident., sess. 6. de justificatione, c. 16. 

4 Job ix. 28. 5 Jeremias xvii. 9. 10. « 1 Cor. iv. 4. 

7 Ps. xviii. 13. 8 Proverbs xir. 12. 9 Proverbs xxi. 2. 

11 


122 


white’s confutation 


not into judgment with thy servants : for in thy sight 
no man living shall be justified.’ 1 Whence St. Augus- 
tin’s advice : “ Dread calling thyself just, unless thou 
hast the words in some other Psalm than that wherein 
we read : * Enter not into judgment with thy servant.’ 
Enter not, then, into judgment with me thy servant. 
I stand in need of thy mercy. For if thou wilt show 
judgment without mercy, whither shall I go ? ‘If 
thou wilt mark iniquities, O Lord : Lord, who shall 
sustain it?’ 2 ‘Enter not into judgment with thy 
servant ; for in thy sight no man living shall be justi- 
fied.’ If therefore no man living shall be justified 
in his sight ; wo to whoever liveth, even though he 
live justly, if God enter into judgment with him.” 3 


CPIAPTER XXII. 

The Nineteenth Article examined . 

This article of your faith, entitled “Of the Church,” 
is as follows. “ The visible Church of Christ is a 
congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure 
Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be 
duly ministered according to Christ’s Ordinance, in 
all those things that of necessity are requisite to the 
same. 

“As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and An- 
tioch, have erred ; so also the Church of Rome hath 
erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremo- 
nies, but also in matters of Faith.” 

EXAMINATION. 

With respect to the first section of this article, we 
assert that, according to the definition which you 
here give of the Church, your congregation cannot 


1 Ps. cxlii. 2. 2 Ps. cxxix. 3. 

3 August, tom. 8., enarrat. in Psal. 42. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 123 

be called the visible Church of Christ : For in your 
congregation neither the pure Word of God is preach- 
ed, nor are certain of the Sacraments administered 
at all, much less duly administered. This is partly 
evident from the facts, reasonings, and arguments we 
have already adduced — and will be rendered still 
more apparent from those that are to follow. With 
the exception of the Roman, we shall pass over the 
other Churches enumerated by you in the latter sec- 
tion of this article: for the Catholics, too, acknowledge 
them to have erred. But we affirm that you, by 
teaching that the Roman Church hath erred in faith, 
manner of ceremonies, and living, are yourselves in 
error ; and that you lead into error all who believe 
this your doctrine. The following reasonings will 
now confirm the truth of this assertion. 

The first argument we shall adduce is derived from 
those ancient forms of profession, under which they 
who had revolted from the Roman See, were, by the 
Roman Pontiffs, again received into the fold of the 
Church. When the Church of Constantinople became 
united to that of Rome, from which it had revolted 
under the leadership of Acatius, John, Bishop of Con- 
stantinople, made the following form of confession. 
“ We, using unequivocally your words, — (viz. those 
of Pope Hormisdas) dictated for us by virtue of your 
high prerogative, do, by the present letter, acknow- 
ledge as followeth : — That it is of the first importance 
to salvation, to guard the rule of the right faith, and 
deviate in nowise from the tradition of the Fathers ; 
that these words of our Lord Jesus cannot be over- 
looked, when he said : ‘ Thou art Peter, and upon this 
rock I will build my Church .’ 1 The things now stated 
are proved by the result ; for in the Apostolic See, the 
Catholic religion is always preserved inviolable,” &c. 
And a little after, he (John, Bishop of Constantinople) 
saith — “ Wherefore, following, as we have already 


i Mat. xvi. 1 8. 


124 


white’s confutation 


declared, the Apostolic See in all things, we proclaim 
whatsoever is decreed by it ,* and consequently hope 
to be united with you in the one communion, which 
the Apostolic See maintains — in which there is pure 
devotion, and the solid substance and perfection of the 
Christian religion. We further promise, that, from 
henceforward, those separated from the communion 
of the Catholic Church, that is, such as do not agree 
with the Apostolic Chair in all things, shall not have 
their names recited during the celebration of the sa- 
cred mysteries.” 1 

This same formula of profession was also sent by 
Pope Hormisdas to the Spanish bishops, in order that 
persons abandoning schism, and seeking communion 
with the church, should be admitted according there- 
to. 2 Pope Boniface II., afterwards prescribed this 
form for Eulalius, bishop of Carthage. 3 See also the 
formula of profession prescribed by Cregory I. for 
schismatics returning to the communion of the Church 
of Rome, book 10. of the epistles collected from the 
Register, chapter 31. 


The second argument is drawn from the testimo- 
nies of the Synods, which prove the integrity of the 
Roman Church in faith and piety. We shall produce 
the testimonies of three Synods. The first w ? e pro- 
duce, is the second Synod of Constantinople, which 
many regard as a general, but all admit to have been 
a solemnly convoked, and numerously attended coun- 
cil. At this Synod Mennas, bishop of Constantino- 
ple, added to the sentence pronounced by him against 
Antimus, bishop of Trapzum, and to which sentence 

1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Libellus fidei Joannis Constantinopolitani 
episcopi ad sanctum Hormisdam Papam, in quo anathematizat Nes- 
torii et Eutychetis et reliquorum haereticorum blasphemias. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Hormisdee Papce ad episcopos His- 
panioe, in qua eis Joannis Constantinopolitani episcopi professionem 
dirigit, propter Orientales clericos, qui eorum communionem propos- 
cerant. 

s Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Bonifacii II., de reconciliatione 
Carthag. ccclesi®. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


125 


all the fathers of the council subscribed — “ For we, 
as your Holiness knows, follow the apostolic chair, 
and obey it. Those in communion with it, we hold 
as communicants; those condemned by it, we also 
condemn .” 1 This synod, therefore, in subscribing to 
the judgment of Mennas (as can be seen in the place 
quoted in the note), embraces, as true and certain, 
the doctrine of the apostolic chair, and consequently 
of the Roman Church, concerning faith and piety. 
For otherwise it would not unexceptionably esteem 
as Catholics, all who communicated with the Roman 
and apostolic church, and condemn all, whom the 
apostolic see condemned. 

The next testimony is that of the sixth general 
council, and the third of Constantinople. In this 
synod was read the profession of faith, which Agatho, 
the Roman Pontiff, sent from a numerous Roman 
synod to the general one of Constantinople, and to 
Constantine Augustus, surnamed Pogonatus, and of 
which the fathers of this general council approved, as 
appears from acts 8, 13, 17, 18. Amongst other 
things contained in the profession of the Pontiff 
Agatho and the Roman Synod, are the following : 
“ He (namely Peter), after three recommendations 
received the feeding of the spiritual sheep of the 
church from the Redeemer of mankind, in conse- 
quence of whose aid and protection, this his apostolic 
church hath never swerved from the way of truth, 
even to the least particle of error; but the whole 
Catholic Church of Christ, and the universal synods, 
faithfully embracing her authority, as that of the 
prince of the apostles, have invariably followed her 
in all things : and all the venerable fathers and holy 
orthodox teachers, joyously receiving her apostolic 
doctrine, whereby the most renowned luminaries of 
the church of Christ became illustrious, have revered 


i Tom. 2. Conciliorum. Concil. 5. generate, Constantinopolit. 
gecund., act. 4., sententiae Mennoe contra Antimum. 

11 * 


126 


white’s confutation 


and followed it : whilst heretics persecuted her with 
false accusations, malevolence, hatred and detrac- 
tion,” &c. And immediately after we read — “ This 
is the rule of the true faith, which, both in prosperity 
and adversity, this spiritual mother — the apostolic 
church of Christ — hath vigorously maintained and 
defended. For she, endowed' with the grace of the 
Omnipotent God, will be proved never to have erred 
from the path of apostolic doctrine, or depravedly 
succumbed to heretical innovations : but as she hath 
received this doctrine from her founders — the princes 
of Christ's apostles — so doth she retain it pure and 
unalloyed to the end of time, according to the Divine 
promise of our Lord and Saviour himself, made in 
the sacred Gospel to the prince of his disciples, when 
he said : * Peter, Peter, behold Satan hath desired to 
have you , that he may sift you as wheat : But I have 
prayed for Thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou 
being once converted, confirm thy brethren .’ 1 Let 
your clemency, therefore, take into calm considera- 
tion, how the Lord and Saviour of mankind, the 
Author of faith, who promised Peter that his faith 
should not fail, admonished him to confirm his breth- 
ren, which duty every one is aware hath been at all 
times confidently performed by my predecessors, the 
apostolic pontiffs ; of whom I, though their inferior, 
yet, because of the ministry conferred on me by 
Divine authority, desire to be the humble follower .” 2 

The third testimony which we produce, is that of 
the seventh general council, and the second of Nice. 
At this council, the Synodical epistle of Adrian the 
first, the Roman pontiff, was read, wherein it is de- 
clared — that the Roman Church is the head of all the 
churches ; that she is perfectly right in her faith, and 
the guardian of uncorrupted religion. This epistle 


J Luke xxii. 31, 32. 

3 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil 6. generate, Constantinopolit. ter-# 
tium, act. 4. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLAND1SM. 


127 


was received and approved of by the general synod, as 
appears from act the second. The words of the epistle 
are partly as follow : “ Wherefore the blessed apostle 
Peter, feeding the church in compliance with God’s 
command, overlooked nothing whatsoever, but ob- 
tained and obtaineth sovereignty everywhere : to 
him and to our blessed and apostolic see, which is 
the head of all the churches of God, I, from sincere 
affection and with my whole heart, wish you to be 
united, as she is perfectly right in her faith, and is the 
guardian of uncorrupted religion.” Then after the 
epistle was read, “ Two priests named Peter, legates 
of the apostolic chair, said : ‘ Let the synod tell us 
whether it receives the letter of his holiness, the 
Bishop of ancient Rome, or not ? Whereupon the 
holy synod replied : “We follow, we receive, and 
*ove of it .” 1 



‘The third argument is derived from the passages 
of Scripture, which prove that the care of the entire 
Church in every thing that regards the Christian 
faith and religion, was committed by Christ to Peter. 
These passages are particularly three, all which are 
advanced in argument by Pope Gregory the First, 
who, according to Bede, was the Apostle of the Eng- 
lish nation . 8 “ It is clear,” saith St. Gregory, “ to 
every one acquainted with the Gospel, that, by the 
words of our Lord, the care of the entire Church was 
committed to Peter, prince of all the Apostles. For 
to him it is said : * Peter, lovest thou me V ‘ Feed my 
sheep .’ 1 2 3 To him it is said : ‘ Behold, Satan hath 
desired to have you that he may sift you as wheat. 
But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not, 
and thou being once converted, confirm thy brethren .’ 4 
To him it is said : * Thou art Peter ; and upon this 
rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell 


1 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. generate septimum, Nicen secun- 
dum, act. 2., epist. Adriani Pap® Tharasio Patriarch©, &c. 

2 Beda. Hist. Ecclesiast lib. 2. c. 1. 

3 John xxi. 


4 Luke xxii. 


128 


white’s confutation 


shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever 
thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in 
heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, 
it shall be loosed also in heaven .’ 1 Behold, he receives 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven; the power of 
binding and loosing is given him ; the charge and 
sovereignty of the entire Church are committed to 
him .” 2 

The first of these scriptural passages — for in eluci- 
dating them we shall follow the order of the Gospels, 
is found in the sixteenth chapter of Saint Matthew . 3 
In this passage, when the Apostles, the representa- 
tives of the entire Church, are interrogated by Christ 
respecting the subject whereon faith and salvation 
depend, Peter answers on the part of all ; and after 
his answer, Christ promises to him and his successors 
such firmness and certainty, in teaching, testifying, 
and confirming the faith of the Church, of which they 
were to be the future “ princes” and “ pastors,” that, 
like an immoveable foundation, they should always 
firmly maintain it against the gates of hell. For it is 
thus the fathers, Greek as well as Latin, explain the 
passage ; and the fathers of the fourth (Ecumenical 
council of Chalcedon, in the sentence passed against 
Dioscorus, having this passage in view, call Peter 
“ the rock and pillar of the Catholic Church .” 4 And 
in the sixteenth Act of this same council, in the ad- 
dress of the Synod to the Emperor Martian, they 
desire to have the Council confirmed and strengthened 
by the authority of the Chair of Peter . 5 

This second passage is contained in the twenty- 
second chapter of Saint Luke . 6 In this passage, 

i Mat. xvi. 2 Gregor, lib. 4., epist. ex Registro, c. 76. 

3 Mat. xvi. 

4 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced., act. 3., liter© direct© a 

Concilio ad Dioscorum, quibus jam tertio vocatus est. 

5 Ibidem, act. 16., Responsio seu allocutio Concilii universalis 
Chalcedonensis ad Martianum Imperatorem. e Luke xxii. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


129 


Christ prayed, not so much for the faith of Peter per- 
sonally, as for that of the “ Pastor,” who was, by his 
never-failing faith, to confirm the whole flock : for not 
only Peter, but ail the apostles were exposed to dan- 
ger. ‘ Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to 
have you, that he may sift you as wheat/ You, that 
is, all you the apostles, and in you the entire Church. 
But though all were in danger, yet it does not follow 
in the text : I have prayed for you ; but — I have 
prayed for thee ; thereby teaching the rest of the 
apostles, that provision was made for thair safety in 
the strength of Peter, their Prince. For on this occa- 
sion, Christ consulted, not only for the stability of 
the faith of the Church, but at the same time for its 
unity, without which the stability of the faith cannot 
be preserved. Teaching all men, in case of tempta- 
tions of faith, to have recourse to their “ Pastor,” 
that in him, in whom Christ hath provided help for 
them, they may find a remedy against such tempta- 
tions. Whence St. Leo the Great, considering this 
passage, says : “ The danger of the temptation of fear 
was common to all the apostles ; and, since the devil 
desired to harass and destroy them all, they all equally 
needed the Divine protection. Yet our Lord specially 
undertakes the care of Peter, and prays for the faith 
of Peter in particular ; as if the state of the rest would 
be more secure, should the mind of their Prince be 
rendered invincible. In Peter, therefore, the fortitude 
of all is secured, and the assistance of the Divine grace 
so arranged, that the firmness bestowed by Christ on 
Peter, can by Peter be conferred on the other apos- 
tles .” 1 Such are the words of Leo. 

We have used the expression, “ in temptations of 
faith :” not indeed that Christ wished Peter to con- 
firm his brethren in this only, but in all temptations. 
For he continues : ‘ And thou being once converted, 


1 Leo, scrmo. 3., in anniversario die assumptions ejus ad Fontifica- 
tum. 


130 


white’s confutation 


confirm thy brethren .’ 1 That means, whenever there 
shall be occasion. * It is not, therefore, confined to 
once only, when converted he wept bitterly ; but as 
often as there is occasion, the faith of Peter, confirm- 
ed against the sifting of Satan and the gates of hell, 
confirms his brethren. And this gift promised to 
Peter, appertains to his successors also. F or in pray- 
ing for Peter, Christ prayed for the good and advan- 
tage of his Church : and the Church always stands in 
need of some one, whose failh cannot fail, by whom 
she may be confirmed. For not only did Satan desire 
to sift the faithful who then lived, but it is his desire 
to sift all the faithful of all ages, and all places, with- 
out exception. God, therefore, who never fails to pro- 
vide his Church with every requisite, bestowed on the 
successors of Peter, as well as on himself, this gift for 
her benefit and advantage. After divers fathers and 
doctors had previously maintained the foregoing doc- 
trine, we find it laid down by Agatho, the Roman 
pontiff, and acknowledged and confirmed in the sixth 
general Council, as we have already remarked. 

Finally, the third scriptural passage is taken from 
Saint John, chapter the twenty-first, when Christ 
appoints Peter the “ Pastor” of his flock. “ For to 
whom,” asks St. Bernard, “ were the entire sheep, 
not only of the bishops, but also of the apostles, thus 
absolutely and indiscriminately committed ? ‘ If thou 
lovest me, Peter, feed my sheep.’ What sheep I The 
people of this or of that particular state, region, or 
kingdom ? My sheep, saith the Lord. To whom is 
it not plain, that he designated not a portion, but 
assigned the whole ? There is no exception, where 
there is no distinction .” 2 * Also Pope Leo the First 


1 Luke xvii. 32. 

* 4 Et tu aliquando conversus, con fir ma fratres tuos.’ “Aliquando,” 
hoc est, si quando opus erit. 

2 Bernardus, lib. 2., ‘De consideratione 1 ad Eugenium Paparn, c. 

8., in Joannem, c. xxi. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


131 


says: “And yet Peter alone is chosen out of the 
whole world, and set above all the apostles and 
fathers, for the calling of the nations of the earth : in 
order that — though there be in the people of God, 
many priests and many pastors — still Peter should 
have the special government of all, under Christ who 
is himself the Prince .” 1 We here omit numerous 
other testimonies, too tedious to be recited in this 
volume, and shall confine ourselves to observing that 
the fathers of the Council of Florence have defined 
that the full power of feeding, directing, and govern- 
ing the universal Church, was delivered by Christ to 
the Roman pontiff, the successor of Peter. 2 

From the passages of Holy Scripture now eluci- 
dated, as also from what has been said on the exami- 
nation of the thirty-seventh article, the arguments 
against which apply to that now under consideration ; 
it is most clear that the Roman Church never erred 
in the doctrine of faith, and Catholic living. For the 
Roman pontiffs have not taught the Roman Church 
differently from the other churches subject to the 
chair of Peter ; nor did the Roman Church ever hold 
any doctrine of faith and living different from the 
other churches adhering to her communion ; and 
since it is certain, that the Roman pontiffs have 
hitherto been the successors of Peter, and that as such 
they have been constituted by Christ, the “pastors” 
of his universal flock, and the “teachers” of the 
whole Christian people ; so Christ hath, according to 
his promise, always governed and directed them in 
such a manner by his Spirit as that they, discharging 
the functions of the chair of Peter, that is, teaching or 
confirming the truth of the Christian faith and reli- 
gion, could never err. All who have adhered to that 


1 Leo, ser. 3. de assumpt. sua ad Pontificatum. 

2 Vide testimonium Concilii Florentini citatum, c. 12 hujus trac- 
tatus. See the testimony of the Council of Florence, alieady quoted 
in the 13th chapter of this work, page 61. 


132 


white’s confutation 


chair, therefore, were safe in the faith and religion of 
Christ ; and they who still adhere to it, are now safe 
in like manner. 


CHAPTER XXIII. 

The Twenty-First Article examined. 

The twenty-first article, entitled “ Of the authority 
of General Councils,” is as followeth : “ General coun- 
cils may not be gathered together without the com- 
mandment and will of princes. And when they be 
gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly 
of men, whereof all be not governed with the spirit 
and word of God), they may err, and sometimes have 
erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Where- 
fore things ordained by them as necessary to salva- 
tion, have neither strength nor authority, unless it may 
be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scrip- 
ture.” 

EXAMINATION. 

When in this article you assail, as it were with a 
double engine, the authority of general councils, you 
inflict on Christianity an injury truly grievous : for by 
means of this and similar doctrines, you have, to the 
perdition of many a soul (how lamentable a reflec- 
tion !), brought back from hell into England, nume- 
rous heresies which had been condemned by general 
councils. 

For in the first place, as if general ecclesiastical 
councils were but mere secular assemblies, you as- 
cribe to secular princes only , the privilege of con- 
voking them, as your doctors, resting on the authority 
of this article, teach at. great length in their writings. 
Secondly, heaping error upon error, you likewise 
teach in this article, that general councils not only 
may, but have, erred even in things pertaining unto 
' God, that is, in faith, as your doctors explain it : both 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM 


133 


'which dogmas of your religion shall now be speedily 
refuted. 

The following declaration of the emperor Valenti- 
nian which is related by Sozomen, is at open variance 
with the truth of the former dogma. For when the 
Catholic bishops asked of him, through their legate, 
permission to assemble for the purpose of determining 
rightly on a doctrine of faith, he replied : — “ It is not 
lawful for me, a layman, to intermeddle in such mat- 
ters : and therefore, let the priests and bishops, to 
whom such concerns appertain , meet apart by them- 
selves, whenever it is their pleasure.” 1 Again, it is 
certain that the councils of the apostles, (Acts c, 15.) 
which can in a certain manner be called a general 
council,* and which is so called by several Catholic 
Doctors, 2 was convoked without the commandment and 
will of any secular prince. And the successors of 
the apostles, the princes of whom the Psalmist speaks, 3 

1 Sozomen., Hist, ecclesiast. lib. 6. c. 7. 

* It is called a general council, because the apostles and others 
who composed it, though few in number, fully represented the 
Catholic Church in her then infant state ; and because it was called 
together by the consent of Peter, who had been established the visi- 
ble head of Christ’s Church upon earth. 

2 Cornelius a Lapide, comment, in Act. c. xv. ; & Wiggers in 2. 
2ae tract, de conciliis ad quoest. primam, art. 10. Dub. 3. Nu. 45. 

3 Psalm xliv. 17. Augustin vol. 8., in his enarration on this Psalm, 
says : “ What meaneth — ‘ Instead of thy fathers, sons are born to 
thee ? The apostles were sent as fathers. Instead of the apostles, 
sons are born to thee, who are constituted bishops. For the bishops 
who are at this day spread throughout the entire world, whence have 
they sprung ? The church calleth them fathers, she begat them ; 
and she established them in the sees of the fathers. Do not then 
think thyself deserted, because thou dost not see Peter, because thou 
dost not see Paul, because thou dost not see those of whom thou wast 
born : for of thy own offspring, fathers have grown up to thee. 
‘ Instead of thy fathers, sons are born to thee.’ Thou shalt make 
them princes over the entire earth. Behold the tbmple of the Kino 
extended far and wide, that the virgins may know that they who 
are not led into the King’s temple, have no part in the festivities of 
the wedding. ‘ Instead of thy fathers, sons are born to thee : thou 
shalt make them princes over all the earth.’ This is the Catholic 
Church ; her sons are constituted princes over all the earth : her 

12 


134 


white’s confutation 


convoked, during the space of three hundred years, 
various councils in various quarters of the world, 
without the commandment and will of secular princes. 
And if the bishops of Rome, the successors of Peter, 
did not convoke general councils at that period, it 
was not for want of possessing the authority, but 
because the tyranny of the secular power prevented 
them from exercising it. 

Now it is evident, that in every kingdom, the sum- 
moning of assemblies concerning the affairs of the 
kingdom, is the province of the person in whom the 
supreme authority is vested, who can command, and 
even enforce, the attendance of all and every one. 
And as the Roman pontiff is Christ’s vicar in the 
Kingdom of the Church ; (as hath been proved in the 
examination of the thirty-seventh and nineteenth arti- 
cles) it is therefore his place, as often as the good of 
the Church requires it, to summon together, and pre- 
side over, general ecclesiastical councils, which are 
the spiritual assemblies of his Kingdom, and those in 
which the spiritual affairs are treated of. Hence, in 
the Council of Chalcedon, which was the fourth (Ecu- 
menical Council, Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, 
was accused — “ For having dared to hold a synod 
without the authority of the apostolic chair, a thing 
that never had been, and never could be lawfully 

sons are established in the stead of her fathers. Let those who are 
cut off know this, let them return to unity, let them he led back to 
the temple of the King. God placed his temple everywhere : the 
foundations of the prophets and apostles, hath he strengthened. The 
church begat sons ; she established them, in the stead of her fathers, 
princes over all the earth.” These are the words of Augustin. And 
Jerom, vol. 8., in his commentary on Psalm 44. verse 17., saith — 
• Instead of thy fathers, sons are born to thee.’ The apostles were 
thy fathers, O church ! because they begat thee. But now that they 
have departed from this world, thou hast thy own sons, as bishops, 
in their stead ; for they have been created by thee. And these, too, 
are the fathers : because thou art governed by them. Thou shalt 
make them princes over all the earth. Christ established his saints 
over all nations. For in the name of God, the Gospel has been car- 
ried to the utmost bounds of the earth — where the princes of the 
church, that is, the bishops, are established.” 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 135 

done .” 1 2 This prerogative of the chair of Peter is also 
proved by a very ancient canon, which (omitting 
many other authorities) is mentioned by the Roman 
pontiffs Marcellus , 8 and Julius , 3 and also by the 
fathers of the Council of Alexandria, in their letter to 
Pope Felix II . 4 * * * 

Moreover, the constant and perpetual practice of 
the apostolic chair, clearly establishes its prerogative 
in this respect; for in every legitimate general coun- 
cil, the authority of the Roman pontiff has always 
been so eminent, that any assembly summoned with- 
out his command, or at least his consent, was not re- 
garded as a true council of the Church ; but as a 
cabal. It would be easy for us, by going through all 
the legitimate general councils, to show the truth of 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. 

2 Tom. 1. Concil. Epistola Decretalis Marcelli Papa? ad Episcopos 
Antiochen® Provinci® : “ Simulque,” inquit,* “ iidem,” (scilicet 
Apostoli et Successores) “ inspirante Domino, Constituerunt, et nulla 
Synodus fieret pr®ter ejusdem Sedis auctoritatem.” 

3 Tom. 1. Concil., Epistola increpatoria Julii Pap®, ad orientales 
Episcopos, pro causis Athanasii, &c. “ Porro,” inquit, t “ dudum a 
sanctis apostolis, successoribusque eorum, in prffifatis antiquis decre- 
tum fuerat statutis, qu® hactenus sancta et universalis Apostolica 
tenet Ecclesia, non oportcre pr®ter sententiam Romani pontificis 
Concilia celebrari.” 

4 Tom. 1. Concil. Epistola iEgyptiorum Pontificum ad Felicem II. 

Papam de infestationibus Arianorum. “Nam scimus,” inquiunt,t 
“in Nicena magna synodo trecentorum & octodecim Episcoporum, 
ab omnibus concorditer esse roboratum, non debere absque Romani 
Pontificis sententia con ilia celebrare,” &c. 

* In the first volume of the Councils, is the Decretal Epistle of Pope Marcel- 
lus to the bishops of the province of Antioch, which partly runs as followeth— 
“ And at the same time they,” namely, the apostles and their successors, “ by 
the inspiration of the Lord, established, that no council should be holden with- 
out the authority of that (the Roman) see." 

t The first volume of the Councils contains the increpatory Epistle of Popa 
Julius to the Eastern Bishops, in the cause of Athanasius, &c. In this epistle, 
he says— “ Moreover, it was formerly decreed, by the holy apostles and their 
successors, jn the forementioned statutes, to which the holy and universal apos- 
tolic Church doth still adhere, that councils should not be celebrated without the 
consent of the Roman pontiff. 

X In the first volume of the Councils, is contained the Epistle of the Egyptian 
bishops to Pope Felix the Second, on the contaminating and violent conduct of 
the Arians. “ For we know,” say they, “ that in the great Council of Nice, 
composed of three hundred and eighty bishops, it was unanimously confirmed 
by them, that it was not lawful to celebrate councils without the approbation 
of the Roman pontiff. 


136 


white’s confutation 


this doctrine ; but as it is our desire to consult brevity, 
we think it will suffice for our present undertaking, to 
prove it from the four councils, commonly called the 
first (Ecumenical Councils — particularly as innova- 
tors often distort these councils into a confirmation of 
their own error, and, above all, that part which relates 
to the summoning of them. 

In the first place, then, the fathers of the sixth 
general Council, in theirpublic address to the empe- 
ror, testify of the first (Ecumenical Council of Nice, 
in these words : “ The ever august Constantine, and 
the praiseworthy Sylvester, assembled a great and 
renowned Synod in Nice ,” 1 &c. Damasus testifies 
the same in his account of Sylvester, which is to be 
found in the Pontifical Book . 2 See Baronius also on 
this subject . 3 

With respect to the first Council of Constantinople, 
it is clear that Theodosius the Great summoned it, 
not so much in right of his own authority, as in com- 
pliance with the letter of Pope Damasus , which ac- 
cording to the testimony of Theodoret, he sent to the 
bishops for that purpose. Theodoret also relates that 
the bishops congregated in the Council of Constanti- 
nople, wrote as follows to Pope Damasus : — “ In obe- 
dience to the mandate of your Holiness’s letter , sent 
in the past year, after the Council of Aquileia, to the 
most holy Emperor Theodosius, we have prepared to 
travel only as far as Constantinople .” 4 Whence the 


1 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. sextum Generale, Constantinopoli- 
tan. tertium, act. 18. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Decreta Sylvest. Primi Papae, ex libro pon- 
tificali Damasi Papae. “ Hujus* (Sylvestri) temporibus, factum est 
concilium cum ejus consensu (vel ut alias legitur), cum ejus praecep- 
to, in Nicea Bithyniae.” 

s Baronius, tom. 3. Annal. ad Annum Domini 324., in fine. 

* Theod. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 5. c. 9. 

* In the Decrees of Pope Sylvester the First, taken from the pontifical book 
of Pope Damasus, and contained in the first volume of the Councils, we read 
as follows “ In his time,” namely, the time of Sylvester, “ a council was held 
with his consent (or, according to another reading, by his command), in Nice, a 
city of Bithynia.” 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


137 


fathers of the sixth general Council, in the passage 
quoted (opposite page), say : “ The Macedonians, 
actuated by the spirit of pride, denied the Deity : but 
the mighty Emperor Theodosius, and Damasus, the 
adamant of the faith, forthwith opposed them,” &c. 

St. Prosper of Aquitain clearly shows the authority 
of the Roman pontiff in the first Council of Ephesus, 
when, in his book against Collator, he thus writes : — 
“ By this man (Celestine) the Oriental Churches 
also were cleansed from a double pestilence, when 
Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, a most glorious defender 
of the faith, was aided by the apostolic sword in 
extirpating the Nestorian heresy,” &C . 1 And again the 
same St. Prosper says : “ In the year of our Lord 432, 
during the consulship of Felix and Taurus, Nestorius, 
bishop of Constantinople, attempts to introduce a 
new error into the Church, by preaching that Christ 
born of Mary was only man and not God, and that the 
Divinity was bestowed on him in consideration of his 
merit. To this impiety are opposed the special dili- 
gence of Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, and the authority 
of Pope Celestine.” 2 It also appears from the epistles 
which passed between Cyril and Celestine (see these 
epistles in the examination of the thirty-seventh article, 
c. 12.), and also from Evagrius, that Cyril was ap- 
pointed legate of the apostolic chair. 3 See likewise 
the testimony of the fathers in the sixth General Coun- 
cil, in the passage quoted, page 148, and the edict of 
the Emperor Martian to the citizens of Constanti- 
nople : 4 from all which it is certain that the Gouncil of 
Ephesus was not called together without the authority 
of the Roman pontiff. 

It is also clear from the epistle of the Emperor 
Martian, that the Council of Chalcedon was not sum- 


1 Prosp. Aquitan., lib. contra Collatorem, c. 41. 

2 Prosperi Aquitan. Chronicon. 

3 Evagrius, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 1. c. 4. 

4 Tom. l.Conciliorum,Concil. Chalced., Act. 3. Martiani Impera- 
toris edictum ad cives Constantinopol. 

12 * 


138 


white’s confutation 


moned without the authority of the Bishop of Rome ; 
for the emperor writes thus to pope Leo : “ It remains 
for me to add, that if it please your holiness to come 
into these parts, and solemnize a synod, your so doing 
would be esteemed a work worthy your love of reli- 
gion, and your holiness will thereby satisfy our desires, 
and decree what is useful for our holy religion. But 
if it be too laborious a task for you to come here, let 
your holiness so inform us by letter, in order that we 
may issue our sacred letters, summoning to whatso- 
ever place we please, all the bishops of the entire 
East, and of Thrace and Illyricum, that they may 
declare and adjust what is useful for the Christian 
religion and the Catholic faith, as your holiness 

SHALL HAVE DEFINED ACCORDING TO THE ECCLESIAS- 
TICAL rules .” 1 Pope Gelasius the First also tes- 
tifies, that it was by the authority of the apostolic 
chair, the Council of Chalcedon was held. Here are 
his words — “ And it was decreed by its authority 
alone that the council of Chalcedon should be con- 
vened .” 2 See the epistle of Leo to Martian Augustus, 
the forty-ninth among the decretals . 3 

As the Roman pontiffs possessed the power of con- 
vening general councils, should any one ask, why the 
emperors not only employed their authority in con- 
voking them, but were also at some times earnestly 
requested by the Roman pontiffs so to do? The 
answer is — because their authority in convoking them 
was extremely serviceable. For if you take into con- 
sideration, either the enormous expense of celebrating 
them — or the protection necessary for securing them 
against the violence and aggressions of heretics and 
others — that the cities in which they were holden 
were imperial — and many other things that required 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced., prseambulares epistol®. 
Epist. Martiani Imperatoris ad Leonem Pontificem Romanum. 

2 Tom. Conciliorum, epist. Gelasii Pap® ed episcopos Dardani®. 

s Leo. epist. 49. ad. Martianum Augustum. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


139 


the authority and munificence of the emperor ; you 
will find they could scarcely have been held by the 
authority of the pontiff alone . 1 2 Indeed, Pope Leo the 
First seems to acknowledge this, when, in his epistle 
to the Emperor Martian, after the Council of Chalce- 
don, he thus writes: “For as it was principally owing 
to your exertions, that that, sacrilegious error lost all its 
force, when the defenders of the impious doctrine 
were condemned by the synodical council ; so if the 
wickedness now crushed in its promoters, be wholly 
extirpated, the palm belongs to you.” These are 
the words of Leo the First. 

Against the absurdity of your latter dogma, Catho- 
lics unanimously hold, that a legitimate general coun- 
cil, that is (according to the ordinary manner of 
speaking), one presided over by the pontiff, or con- 
firmed by him, is of infallible authority in its decrees re- 
garding matters of faith. For a legitimate oecumenical 
council represents the Catholic Church ; and for this 
reason whatever is decreed by it, is considered as de- 
creed by the holy Catholic Church. St. Augustinshows 
this to be the case, when he calls the decision of a ple- 
nary council, “ the consent of the whole church .” 3 And 
before him, St. Athanasius, who says in one of his 
epistles — “ and this was the reason why the whole 
world assembled in council,” &c . 4 Here he calls three 
hundred and eighty fathers congregated in the Council 
of Nice, the whole world. But as the Church is the 
pillar and ground of the truth ; 5 and as the spirit of 
truth that abideth with her for ever, guides her in all 
things relating to faith ; surely, whosoever doth not 
believe her, when speaking and defining in council, 
and who doth not acquiesce in her definitions of faith, 


1 Leo. epist. 25. ad Theodosium Augustum. 

2 Leo. epist. 59. ad Martianum Augustum. 

3 August, tom. 7, de baptismo, contra Conatis. , lib. 1. c. 18. 

4 Athanas. , epist. de synodis Arimini et Seleuciffi celebratis, non 
procul a principio. 

s 1 Tim. iii. 15. 


140 


white’s confutation 

is, according to the command of Christ, to be regarded 
as a Heathen and a Publican . 1 

Secondly, Catholics have always taught, and now 
teach, that the definition of a general council in mat- 
ters of faith is a final, irrevocable, and wholly immu- 
table judgment : they, therefore, have always believed, 
and now believe, such judgment to be perfectly cer- 
tain and infallible. And were it otherwise it would 
be unjust in such case, to compel all people to abide 
by it, and not to admit of any ulterior inquiry for the 
purpose of arriving at another decision. We shall 
now produce some testimonies in confirmation of what 
we allege. Pope Leo the First, in his epistle to Leo 
Augustus, thus writes : — “ Know then beforehand, 
venerable emperor, that they whom I pledge myself 
are to proceed from the apostolic chair, shall be 
directed not to enter into conflict with, or dispute 
against, the enemies of the faith. For we dare not 
meddle with the things defined, as it hath pleased 
God, at Nice and Chalcedon — as if what have been 
fixed by so high an authority, under the guidance of 
the Holy Ghost, can be doubtful or unsettled.” 2 
These are the words of Leo. 

And Pope Gelasius the First, following Leo, says 
in his epistle to the bishops of Dardania: — “ Where- 
fore, laying aside the folly of vain complaints, it be- 
hoveth you to study the blessed apostles themselves, 
and prudently to consider that whatsoever our Catho- 
lic fathers, namely, the learned pontiffs, have, concern- 
ing any heresy, at whatsoever time it originated, once 
determined in council, as faith, truth, Catholic and 
apostolic communion, according to the rule of the 
Scriptures and the preaching of our forefathers, they 
decreed that that shall remain for ever undisturbed 
and established. Neither did they suffer the things 
previously fixed to be again, from any fresh presump- 
tion, meddled with ; for they wisely foresaw, that, if it 


1 Mat. xviii. 17. 


2 Leo, epist. 78. c. 3. ad Leonem. Auguetum. 


OF CHUIICH-OF-ENGLAND1SM. 


141 


were allowed to go over afresh what had been whole- 
somely decreed, no constitution of the Church could 
possibly remain stable against each individual error ; 
and that, owing to the perpetual revival of the same 
furious sects, every sound definition should be dis- 
turbed .” 1 

Again, Pope Gregory the First, following both 
Gelasius and Leo, declares, that he receives and 
venerates the four councils which preceded his time, 
as he does the four books of the New Testament ; and 
pronounces anathema against whomsoever presumes 
to add to, or take from, the faith defined in them. 
“ All persons,” saith he, “ whom the forementioned 
venerable councils reject, I reject; all whom they 
reverence, I embrace : for as they were constituted 
by the consent of the whole universe, whosoever pre- 
sumeth either to loose those whom they bind, or to 
bind those whom they loose, destroyeth himself, and 
not the councils. Whosoever, therefore, believeth 
otherwise, let him be anathema .*’ 2 See the words of 
Gelasius at length in the passages already quoted. 

The Edict of the Emperor V alentinian and of his 
colleague Martian, in which they confirm the decrees 
of the Synod of Chalcedon, still remains extant ; and 
amongst other things we read in it the following 
words : “ Priests the most religious have, according 
to our commands, come from different provinces to 
Chalcedon, and have taught and clearly defined what 
is to be observed in religion. Let, therefore, profane 
contention be at an end. Nay, that man is truly im- 
pious and sacrilegious, who, after the decision of so 
many priests, leaves any thing to be treated of by his 
own opinion. For it is the extreme of madness to be 
looking for artificial light in the noon of a clear day. 
And whosoever keepeth discussion alive after the 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Gelasii Pap® ad Episcopos Dardani®. 

2 Gregor, epist. ex Registro, lib. 1. c. 24. ; ct ibidem, lib. 2. c. 49. ; 
et lib. 3. c. 33. 


142 


white’s confutation 


truth is discovered, seeketh after falsehood.” And in 
the end of this Edict we read as follows — “All, there- 
fore, must guard the things decreed by the Holy Synod 
of Chalcedon, doubting nothing for the future. So, 
warned by this our edict, abstain from profane dis- 
courses, and dispute no longer about Divine matters — 
which it is unlawful for you to do. For not only will 
this sin be punished by the Divine judgment, as we 
believe : but it shall also be restrained by the autho- 
rity of our laws and judges .” 1 See also, in the place 
now quoted, the Edict of the Emperor Martian to the 
citizens of Constantinople, on the confirmation and 
observance of the acts of the Council of Chalcedon . 2 

Thirdly, if a general council were fallible, there 
would be no sure tribunal in the Church, for deter- 
mining questions and controversies of faith, and pre- 
serving the unity of the Church ; for nothing in the 
Church is greater than a general legitimate council, 
which perfectly represents those whom Christ ap- 
pointed for attending to these concerns . 3 And in 
vain is it alleged by innovators, that the sacred Scrip- 
tures are a higher authority, and the last appeal : for 
all contr over lists affirm that the decision of Scripture 
is on their onvn side. If, therefore, the authority of a 
council could be called into question, or the private 
judgment of individuals tolerated, what would be 
more uncertain than our faith ? or what more con- 
fused than the state of the Church? What end, pray, 
would there be of inquiring and disputing? What else, 
in fine, would this be but to cause the consciences of 
men to be for ever fluctuating ? So that these words 
of St. Paul may be justly applied to them : — ‘ Ever 
learning and never attaining to the knowledge of the 
truth . ’ 4 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced., Act. 3. Edictum, sive 
leges sanctce Memoriae Valentiniani et Martiani Imperatorum, &c. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. Act. 3., Martiani Impera. 
toris Edictum ad cives Constantinopol., &c. 

3 Ephes. iv. 11, 12, 14, 14. 4 2 Tim. iii. 7. 


OP CHURCH-OF-PNGLANDISM. 


143 


Were the judgment of a general legitimate council 
fallible, then indeed well might all the heresies, here- 
tofore condemned, be again called into dispute. For 
Arius would say, that the first Council of Nice erred ; 
Macedonius would say the same of the first Council 
of Constantinople ; Nestorius would say the Council 
of Ephesus erred ; Eutyches would say the very same 
respecting that of Chalcedon : and so on of the rest. 
Neither do w^e see how the councils could be in any 
way vindicated from the charge of arrogance, if they 
proposed for the belief of mankind, as an article of 
faith, and that too under the pain of anathema (as they 
have often done), any one thing, the truth or false- 
hood of which was not established beyond doubt. 

Fourthly, if God manifested so much zeal in assist- 
ing the ancient Synagogue, as that, when any thing 
difficult or ambiguous occurred in the law, which 
could not be incontrovertibly decided by the judges 
and ordinary lawgivers, they should not want for a 
special assembly, by whose sentence the question in 
dispute should be wholly determined ; surely, it is 
absurd to say, that the Church, which is of far more 
importance than the Synagogue, should be so desti- 
tute of necessary aid as that, when a question of faith 
arises, its children should be unprovided with an 
authority whereon they may safely rely : and yet, this 
must needs be the case, if its greatest and highest 
authority, which consists in the decree of a general 
council, can be called into question and doubt. 

Finally, the Scripture attributes to the Holy Ghost 
the decrees of the apostolic Council — ■* For it hath 
seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no 
further burden upon you/ &C . 1 And as the bishops, 
the successors of the apostles, assembled in a general 
legitimate council, have received from that of the 
apostles the form of celebrating councils ; so they in 
like manner receive an assurance of the Divine aid, 


• Aots xv. 28. 


144 


white’s confutation 


which, in necessary cases — such as definitions of the 
true faith when heresies arise — is never wanting to 
the Church perfectly represented in a general legiti- 
mate council : for Christ promised that he himself 
would be with his Church, ‘ALL DAYS, EVEN 
TO THE CONSUMMATION OF THE WORLD . 1 
Whence Pope Leo the First, in the epistle already 
cited, saith, — “ For we dare not meddle with the 
things defined, in the manner it hath pleased God, 
both at Nice and Chalcedon ; as if what have been 
fixed by so high an authority, under the guidance of 
the Holy Ghost, can be doubtful or unsettled .” 2 And 
before him, St. Cyril of Alexandria says : — “ Come, 
let us see, if you please, what the heterodox imagine 
to be wrong in those things now brought into question, 
and which were formally defined in the holy and most 
numerously attended Council of Nice. For whoso- 
ever chooseth to maintain the faith, which hath been 
defined and explained most correctly, and with the 
assistance of God, by that holy and great Synod, the 
stay and firm prop of our souls ; he indeed will pro- 
claim the truth, obtain glory with Christ, and shine 
forth a faithful and true adorer. But,” &c . 3 


CHAPTER XXIV. 

The Twenty-Second Article examined . 

The twenty-second article, entitled “Of Purgatory,” 
is as follows — “ The Romish Doctrine concerning 
Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as 
well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of 
Saints, is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded 


1 Matt, xxviii. 20. 

2 Leo, epist. 78. c. 3. ad Leonem Augustum. 

3 Cyrillus Alexand., tom. 5. dialog. 1. de Sancta Trinitate, non 
procul a principio. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


145 


upon no warrant of Scripture, but rather repugnant 
to the Word of God.” 


EXAMINATION. 

This article contains far more than its title pretends 
to. For in it you treat not only of Purgatory, but 
also of other parts of the Catholic doctrine ; and you 
write, brethren, in a style (would to God ! not also in 
a spirit) plainly heretical, as will presently appear, 
on the examination of each head. 

SECTION THE FIRST. 

ON PURGATORY. 

Purgatory, according to the Catholic belief, is a 
place destined for the purifying of those souls, which 
depart this life without being wholly cleansed, or ab- 
solved from all the punishment that they deserve . 1 
And the Catholic Church hath always recommended 
to God, as she still continues to recommend by prayer, 
sacrifice, and other acts of charity, the souls of many 
after they become released from the body. But she 
cannot believe the souls so recommended to be in 
heaven; for ‘there shall not enter into it any thing 
defiled .’ 2 And in heaven there is only the Church of 
the triumphant — ‘ not having spot or wrinkle, or any 
such thing .’ 3 Neither can she believe that they are 
in hell ; for no acts of charity can avail the miserable 
souls there condemned. She admits, therefore, of a 
third receptacle for souls — and this place is called 
purgatory. 

The foregoing doctrine of the Church respecting 
purgatory, is proved partly from Scripture, partly 
from Tradition. In the second book of Machabees 
we read, that sacrifice was offered for those who had 


i Concilium provinciate Cameracense, anno 1565, de Purgatorio, 

c. 1. — Vide Concil. Trident, sess. 25. ; ettom. 3. Conciliorum, ConciL 

provinciale Senonense, anno 1528. 4 * De Satisfactione, Purgatorio, et 

Commemoratione defunctorum,’ decret. 12. 

a Apocal. xxi. 27. 8 Ephcs. v. 27. 

13 


white’s confutation 


140 

died in godliness. ‘And it is said to be a holy and 
wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they 
may be loosed from their sins.’ 1 Neither was it in the 
time of Judas Machabaeus that this holy and whole- 
some regard was first paid to the dead ; but it was a 
practice derived from the fathers. For long before 
the time of Judas Machabaeus, David with his follow- 
ers fasted for the death of Saul and Jonathan, and 
the people of the Lord who had fallen in battle. 2 And 
lest it might be imagined that they fasted and wept 
only after the manner of carnal men, who grieve for 
the death of their friends, without desiring to obtain 
any thing from God by their mourning, David saith, 
there is no cause to fast for his infant son, now that 
he is dead : 3 but that he fasted before his death, be- 
cause he then hoped to obtain the favour of his life 
from God 4 — clearly signifying hereby, that he used 
to weep and fast only in order to obtain some benefit 
at the hand of God. Hence the venerable Bede, 
writing on these words of the last chapter of the 1st 
Kings* — ‘ The men of Jabes Galaad fasted seven 
days,’ saith, “ It is right, and literally so, to fast seven 
days for the dead, that they may arrive at rest : for 
after the six stages of this life, during which we labour 
in the flesh, the seventh is, for the souls departed, that 
state of rest in the other life, where the blessed await 
the glorious hour, when they shall deserve to rise 
again.” 5 When David, therefore, fasted for the dead, 
he did so, in order that they may be thereby relieved. 


i Machabecs xii. 43, 44, 45, 46. 8 2 Kings i. 12. 

3 ‘ But now that he is dead, why should I fast ? Shall I be able 
to bring him back any more ? I shall go to him rather : but he 

shall not return to me.’ 2 Kings xii. 23. 

4 1 And he said : While the child was yet alive, I fasted and toept 
for him : for I said : Who knoweth whether the Lord may not give 
him to me, and the child may live ?’ 2 Kings xii. 22. 

* This and the following book are called by the Hebrews the 
Books of Samuel, because they contain the history of Samuel ; but 
they are generally called by the fathers, the first and second Book 
of Kings. 

5 Beda, Expositionis Allegoric®, lib. 4. c. 10. seu ultimo, in Sam. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


147 


In the New Testament, also, Christ teaches that 
some sins shall be remitted in the life to come . 4 
“For,” says St. Augustin, considering this passage, 
“ it could not with truth be said of some persons that 
their sin shall not be forgiven them, either in this 
world, or in the world to come, unless there were 
sins, which though not in this, yet shall be forgiven in 
the world to come .” 2 And in the same Gospel, Christ 
teacheth us to pray, not only for the remission of our 
own, but likewise for the remission of the sins of our 
brethren . 8 Moreover, it was clear to the penitent thief 
on the cross, that he should be numbered amongst the 
dead before Christ would come into his kingdom. 
And yet he believed that his soul could, in that state, 
be profited;* otherwise he would not have prayed thus: 
* Lord, remember me when thou shalt have come into 
thy kingdom.’ And so far from Christ reproving 
him, for praying in this manner, He, on the contrary, 
graciously heard his prayer, and answered — ‘Amen 
I say to thee, this day shalt thou be with me in para- 
dise .’ 4 

We shall next proceed to tradition. St. Augustin 
saith: — “We read in the books of the Machabees, 
that sacrifice was offered for the dead. But though 
no such words were to be read in any part of the 
Old Testament; yet the authority of the universal 
Church — of which this is a manifest usage — should 
be deemed sufficient. When the priest at the altar 
pours forth his prayers to the Lord God, the recom- 


1 Mat. xii. 31. 

2 August., tom. 5. de Civitate Dei, lib. 21, c. 24. 3 Mat. vi. 12. 

* Christ does not in any part of the Divine Scriptures promise to 

rise from the dead before the third day — the penitent thief knew 
this — he did not expect to go straight into Heaven, as is evident 
from the nature of his prayer — neither did he expect to go into 
hell, for out of that there is no redemption ; if then he did not hope to 
go into some place of purification, where he might be freed from 
‘ spot and wrinkle,’ where did he expect to remain until the resurrec- 
tion of his Lord and Master ? 

4 Luke xxiii. 42, 43. 


148 


white’s confutation 


mendation of the souls departed hath also its place in 
them .” 1 And in another work, he says : “ It cannot 
be denied, that the souls of the dead are relieved by 
the piety of the living, when the sacrifice of the Me- 
diator is offered, or alms are given in the Church for 
their sake. But these things are available only to 
such as have acquired by their merits, while in this 
life, that they should be profitable to them after it. 
For there is a certain mode of living, neither so per- 
fect as not to require them, nor yet so bad as not to 
be benefited by those things after death. There is 
also a mode of living so good as not to stand in need 
of them, and again another so bad as not to be re- 
lieved by them, after this life. Wherefore it is here 
that every merit is procured, by which each may be 
relieved or weighed down hereafter. But let no one 
hope to obtain from God, after death, a merit which 
he despiseth while living. The practice of the Church, 
therefore, in recommending the souls departed, is not 
opposed to this declaration of the apostle, which saith 
— ‘ We must all appear before the judgment seat of 
Christ, that every one may receive the proper things 
of the body, according as he hath done, whether it be 
good or evil ;’ 2 because each person, while in the body, 
acquired for himself the advantage of having the good 
works of the living rendered available to him after 
death. But all are not aided by them. And why, 
but because of the difference of their lives ? When, 
therefore, the sacrifice of the altar or alms are offer- 
ed for deceased Christians: in regard to the very 
good, they are acts of thanksgiving ; for the imper- 
fect, acts of propitiation ; and though to the very 
wicked they afford no relief, yet are they so many 
consolations to the living. And such as are aided by 
them, obtain either a full remission, or at least a miti- 


1 August, tom. 4., lib. de cura pro mortuis gerenda, ad Paulinum, 
c. 1. 

2 2 Cor. V. 10. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


149 


gation of their sentence ,” 1 that is, of the temporal 
pains, for the remission of which the suffrages of the 
living are offered. 

Now that some who depart this life, are subjected 
to this species of condemnation, St. Augustin more 
clearly teaches in the words which follow : “ Some 
undergo temporal punishment in this life only ; others 
after death ; and others both here and hereafter : yet 
all before that most severe and last judgment. But 
ail who suffer temporal punishment after death, do 
not go into the eternal torments, which shall be the 
portion of some after the general judgment. For, as 
we have said above, what is not forgiven to some in 
this world, is forgiven them in the world to come ; 2 
that they may escape eternal torments .” 3 And again, 
St. Augustin says: — “The prayers of the Church 
and of certain pious persons, are heard in favour of 
those Christians, who neither spent their lives so 
badly as to be deemed unworthy of this mercy, nor 
yet in so godly a manner as not to stand in need of it. 
So also, at the resurrection of the dead, there shall 
not fail to be some, to whom, after the pains which 
the spirits of the dead endure, mercy will be imparted, 
in order that they be not cast into eternal fire. For 
it could not with truth be said of some, that their sin 
shall not be forgiven, either in this world, or in the 
world to come, unless there were sins which, though 
not forgiven in this, yet shall be forgiven in the world 
to come .” 4 

Wherefore, the same St. Augustin, in another work, 
saith : — “ Supplications for the souls of the dead are 
not to be neglected. The Church offereth them for 
all who die in the Christian and Catholic communion, 


1 August, tom. 3. Enchirid. ad Laurent.; c. 109 & 110. 

a Mat. xii. 32. 3 August, tom. 5. de Civitate Dei, lib. 21. c. 13. 

4 August, tom. 5. de Civitate Dei, lib. 21. c. 24. — Vide tom. 10. de 
verbis Apost., ser. 94. ; vel secundum alios 32., ubi Augustinus ha bet 
luculentum testimonium de hac re. Vide etiam tom. 5. de Civitate 
Dei, lib, 21. c. 16. 

13 * 


150 


white’s confutation 


even for those whose names are not mentioned in the 
general commemoration, in order that such as have 
not parents or children, relatives or friends, to attend 
to those concerns, may have them offered for them by 
the one pious and common mother .” 1 And in the last 
chapter of the same book, he thus concludes : “ Since 
this is the case, let us not imagine that they avail the 
dead for whom we feel concern, unless we solemnly 
offer in their behalf the sacrifice of the altar, or 
prayers, or alms deeds — though these things be not 
available to all the persons for whom they are offered, 
but to such only as secure, while in this life, the ad- 
vantage of their being rendered beneficial to them. 
And as we cannot discern which these are, we must 
offer them for all Christians, in order that none be 
neglected, to whom those benefits can and ought to 
extend. For it is better that they be superfluous as 
regards those, whom they neither injure nor serve, 
than that they should be wanting to such as they re- 
lieve. Yet each performeth those duties the more 
diligently for his own friends, that the same may in 
turn be done for himself by his .” 2 

And St. Chrysostom, treating on this subject, saith 
— “ It was not in vain ORDAINED BY THE 
APOSTLES, that in celebrating the tremendous 
mysteries, mention should be made of the dead ; for 
they well knew that much benefit, would thence accrue 
to them. For when God beholdeth the whole assem- 
bly of the people standing with hands uplifted to 
heaven, the sacerdotal choir also, and the venerable 
sacrifice lying on the altar, how can our prayers for 
the deceased fail to prove efficacious with Him ? 
But this we say, indeed, of such as have departed in 
the faith .” 3 

Read, brethren, the ancient liturgies of James, Basil, 

1 August, tom. 4. lib. de cura pro mortuis, ad Paulinum, c. 4. 

2 Ibidem, c. 18. 

8 Chrysost. tom. 4. comment, in Philip, c. 1., ser. 3. moral, exhortat 


OF CHURCH-0 F-ENGLANDISM. 


151 


Chrysostom, Ambrose, Gregory the First, &c. ; and 
in them you will find prayers and the sacrifice of the 
altar offered for the dead. And for what other end, 
we ask, were they offered, but to relieve the souls in 
purgatory? — as we have already showm from St. 
Augustin, when explaining the doctrine and sense of 
the Catholic Church on this subject. Nay, indeed, so 
perfect was the concurrence of the Catholics of anti- 
quity regarding this doctrine, that one thousand two 
hundred years ago, Acrius was (as Epiphanius 1 and 
Augustin 2 relate) accounted a heretic , for teaching, 
that prayers or oblations were not to be offered for 
the souls departed this life. 

SECTION THE SECOND. 

ON INDULGENCES. 

The word of God clearly demonstrates that Christ 
gave to his apostles, and their successors, the power 
of using the keys of the kingdom of heaven, for the 
advantage and edification of his Church . 3 And as it 
appertains to this power to enjoin condign satisfac- 
tion on penitents ; so it appertains to the same to re- 
mit, on reasonable grounds, the satisfactory punish- 
ment, either entirely or in part — and this is called 
granting an indulgence. 

The apostle Paul exercised this power of indul- 
gence, when he said : ‘To him that is such a one this 
rebuke is sufficient, that is given by many : so that 
contrariwise you should rather pardon and comfort 
him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with 
over much sorrow .’ 4 By these words the apostle 
commands, that some portion of the rigorous penance 
enjoined on the incestuous Corinthian be remitted 
him ; lest, perhaps, drawn into despair by too great 

1 Epiphan. contra hcereses, lib. 3. — Tom. 1. contra Aerium, liaeres. 
75. 

2 August, tom. 6, lib. de hseresibus ad Quodvultdeum, hoeres. 53. 

3 Mat. xvi. 19. ; xviii. 18. ; and 2 Cor. x. 8. ; xiii. 10. 

< 2 Cor. ii. 0, 7. 


152 


white’s confutation 


austerity of punishment, he might abandon the Chris- 
tian religion. This pardon or forgiveness, therefore, 
which the apostle mentions, was in reality nothing 
more or less than the granting of an indulgence, re- 
specting which he again subjoins : ‘ And to whom you 
have pardoned any thing, I also. For what I have 
pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your 
sakes have I done it in the person of Christ. That 
we be not overreached by Satan : For we are not 
ignorant of his devices / 1 When the apostle uses 
these words, “ in the person of Christ,” he thereby 
signifieth that he received from Christ, and exercised 
in the stead of Christ, this power of granting pardons 
or indulgences ; just as he before testified, that it was 
in the name of Christ he had delivered up this, same 
fornicator to Satan . 2 

And that such is the sense of these words, the tes- 
timony of St. Chrysostom plainly proves: “For,” 
says Chrysostom, “ not because he is worthy, or hath 
shown sufficient repentance ; but because he is weak, 
doth the apostle say — I think him worthy of pardon. 
And for the same reason he also adds — ‘ Lest perhaps 
such an one be swallowed up with over much sorrow/ 
But this language declares the Corinthian’s vehement 
repentance, which Paul did not suffer to grow into 
despair.” And a little after, Chrysostom subjoins : 
“ For it was not as one perfect, who had purified him- 
self, that the apostle said — ‘ I have received him 
but it was on the contrary, because he felt apprehen- 
sive of his falling into a state still more grievous. By 
the example which the apostle here sets, we are 
taught that the penance must be regulated, not only 
according to the nature of the sins, but also according 
to the disposition and habits of the sinner : for the 
apostle took all these considerations into account in 
the instance before us .” 3 St. Pacianus, who wrote 


1 2 Cor. ii. 10, 11. 2 1 Cor. v. 4, 5. 

3 Chrysost. tom. 4. comment, in 2 Cor. c. 2., homil. 4. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 153 

before Chrysostom, considering these words of Saint 
Paul — ‘ For what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned 
any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person 
of Christ,’ 1 2 says : “ Do you see the indulgence of the 
apostle moderating even his own sentence ? Do you 
perceive his extreme lenity, consulting for the com- 
mon life and salvation of all ? How different is it 
from your superciliousness ? How unlike the haughty 
brow of Novatian ?’ 8 

It can easily be proved from the ancient councils, 
also, that the Church thenceforward retained this 
custom of relaxing penance, which she received from 
the apostles. The fathers of the first oecumenical 
Council of Nice declare, that, towards such penitents 
as prove the sincerity of their conversion, not by 
words only, but also by works and truth, it is lawful 
for the bishops to be rather humane and considerate, 
that is to say — it is lawful for the bishops to remit 
some portion of the rigorous penance enjoined on 
them. Here are the words of the canon : — “ But let 
it be particularly remembered by all, that the dispo- 
sition of their minds and the fruits of their repent- 
ance, are to be taken into consideration. For when 
they who manifest their conversion, not by mere 
words, but by deeds and truth, by a holy fear, per- 
severing tears, and good works, shall have completed 
the period prescribed for them, and begun to com- 
municate in the public prayers ; it shall then be lawful 
for the bishops to treat them with a degree of cle- 
mency, and to be considerate in their regard. But such 
persons as shall have looked on their fall with indif- 
ference, and who imagine that it is enough for them 
to have entered the Church, shall complete the full 
and entire period assigned them for their penance.” 3 * 


1 2 Cor. ii. 10. 

2 Tom. 4., Biblioth. Patrum. Paciani Barcilonens. episcopi epist. 

3. ad Sympronianum contra tractatus Novatianorum. 

8 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Nicen. primum, c. 11. 


154 white’s confutation 

The fathers of the Council of Ancyra, likewise, 
which was holden prior to that of Nice, thus decree 
concerning the granting of indulgences to penitents : 
“ It is meet that, upon closely inspecting the lives of 
the people, the bishop should possess the power of 
prescribing a line and rule of conduct for each of 
them : that is to say, that, acting more mildly towards 
some, he may, according to the tenor of their lives, 
abridge the period of their penance ; or, on the other 
hand, prolong that of others, according as he shall 
deem expedient for their correction. But let the 
foregoing and subsequent part of the life of each be 
carefully examined, and the sacerdotal indulgence 
regulated accordingly.” 1 

What we read in the fourth Council of Carthage, 
at which St. Augustin was present, and which he 
subscribed, also regards this subject. In the 75th 
and 76th chapters we read that penitents are to be 
admitted to reconciliation sooner or later, according 
to their earnestness or negligence : and that any one 
reconciled during sickness, shall, if he survive, be 
subjected to the established laws of penance, so long 
as the priest who prescribed the penance for him shall 
think proper. 2 From this it is evident, that the priest 
had it in his power to abridge some portion of the 
time decreed for penance. Add to the foregoing fact, 
that among the other articles of John Wickleff, which 
have been condemned by the fathers of the general 
Council of Constance, was the following — “ To be- 
lieve in the indulgences of the pope and bishops, is 
foolish.” 3 

But though the ancient fathers clearly taught that 
the Church possessed this power of granting indul- 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Ancju-an., c. 5. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Carthag. 4, habitum ab episcopis 
214. c. 75, 76. 

3 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Constant, sess. 8. Sententia damna- 
tionis doctrinal Joannis Wicleff & articulorum quadraginta quinque, 
artic. 42. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


155 


gences ; yet, anxiously consulting for the interest of 
penitents, and apprehensive lest the ecclesiastical dis- 
cipline might become weakened, they always exer- 
cised it with moderation, so that we seldom read of 
their remitting to penitents the whole, but a part only 
of the canonical penance and satisfaction enjoined on 
them. Wherefore the ancient councils decree, as 
hath been already said, that some indulgence should 
be shown those penitents, who manifest their change 
of life, not by words only, but by deeds and truth, by 
fear, persevering tears, and good works. And St. 
Cyprian also requests of the martyrs, that they will 
recommend, in their petitions to the bishops for ob- 
taining indulgences, none but those whose repentance 
they shall find bordering on satisfaction . 1 In fine, the 
apostle Paul did not dispense with the residue of the 
incestuous Corinthian’s penance, until his affliction 
became so grievous that the danger of despair was to 
be apprehended from it. For as God in his justice 
frequently leaves the penitent, after his guilt is remit- 
ted him, subject to temporal punishments, and bound 
to satisfy for them ; so in like manner, he doth not 
wish that those punishments should be remitted by 
his ministers, except on just and sufficient grounds : 
neither, if it be done, does the act meet with his ap- 
proval. For Christ is the lord of the keys; the 
bishops are but the ministers : they must, therefore, 
use them, not at their own caprice, but according to 
the intention of their lord. 

The fathers of the Council of Trent have establish- 
ed by a truly pious and wise ordinance, the doctrine 
of indulgences, when they decree as followeth : — “As 
the power of granting indulgences hath been given by 
Christ to his Church ; and as she hath exercised, even 
in the most ancient times, this same power given her 
by God : this holy synod teaches and commands, 


1 Cyprian, epist. 11, ad Martyres et Confessores, qui lapsis petie- 
rant paccm dari. 


156 white’s confutation 

that the use of indulgences, being most useful to 
Christian people, and approved by the authority of 
sacred councils, shall be retained in the Church ; and 
anathematizes those who either assert that they are 
useless, or deny that there resides in the Church the 
power of granting them. Yet it wishes that, in grant- 
ing them, moderation, agreeably to the ancient and 
approved practice of the Church, be observed ; lest 
by an over facility of oblaining them, the ecclesiasti- 
cal discipline should become relaxed. But being de- 
sirous that the abuses which have crept into them, 
on account of which the glorious name of indulgences 
is blasphemed by heretics, shall be amended and cor- 
rected, this synod enacts, by virtue of the present de- 
cree, that all sordid gain for obtaining them — whence 
proceeded a most fertile source of abuses among the 
Christian people — shall be wholly and entirely abo- 
lished .” 1 

And after the Council of Trent, the provincial 
Synod of Cambray thus decrees respecting indul- 
gences : “ Whereas, by means of indiscreet and su- 
perfluous indulgences, the keys of the Church are 
despised, and penitential atonement relaxed ; this holy 
synod forbids any person to recommend and offer to 
the people, as serviceable, any new or unauthenticated 
indulgences, until they shall first have been inspected 
and approved by the ordinary. And this synod also 
commands that the clergy shall diligently exhort their 
flocks, not to lend faith rashly to any bills hawked 
about, even though they be printed, which promise 
exorbitant indulgences for frivolous, vain and super- 
stitious causes ; because indulgences can be granted 
only on religious and rational grounds .” 2 


1 Concil. Trident, sess. 25., continuat. soss. decret. de Indulgentiis. 

2 Concil. Cameracense, anno Domini 1565., decret. de Indulgentiia. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


157 


SECTION THE THIRD. 

ON THE RESPECT AND VENERATION DUE 
TO IMAGES. 

The Church has made use of holy images from the 
very time of the apostles ; and has approved of them 
as being in many ways useful to pious and religiously 
inclined persons . 1 For whilst the Christian devoutly 
surveys the mystery of his redemption, presented to 
his view by pictures and other modes of representa- 
tion, the articles of faith are, by means thereof, piously 
recalled to his mind, and deeply impressed upon it . 2 
Indeed, as the fathers of the Council of Trent ob- 
serve : “ Great fruit is derived from all sacred images ; 
not only because the people are reminded of the fa- 
vours and gifts bestowed upon them by Christ, but 
also because the miracles wrought by the saints of 
God, and their salutary examples, are presented to 
the eyes of the faithful : that they may return thanks 
to God for them — dispose their lives and conduct in 
imitation of the saints — and be stimulated to the ado- 
ration and love of God and the practice of piety .” 3 

Moreover, we find that they who entertain esteem 
and affection for chosen friends, pay due honour to 
their images, and often kiss them in testimony of the 
regard and love which they bear them. “ For the 
respect paid the image is,” as St. Basil saith, “ refer- 
red to the prototype .” 4 And in like manner they 
who desire to preserve an honourable recollection 
of good and holy men, in order to perpetuate their 
memory, preserve by all the means in their power the 
monuments raised to them, even by others. But, on 

1 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Nicen. 2., generale 7., Act 7. 

2 Tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. provinciale Senonense, anno Domini 
1528, decrct. 14. de veneratione sacrarum imaginum. 

8 Concil. Trident., sess. 25., de invocatione, et veneratione, et reli- 
quiis Sanctorum, et sacris imaginibus. 

4 Basilius ad S. Amphilochium, Iconii episcopum, lib. de Spiritu 
Sancto, c. 18. 

14 


158 white’s confutation 

the contrary, pious and just princes tear down the 
images of the wicked ; and destroy, if they have any, 
the memorials of respect, belonging to such as are 
condemned for high treason ; because they wish to 
blot out from the minds of men all honourable recol- 
lection of them. Whence it is that Catholics have 
always retained the rational, salutary, and venerable 
use of holy images — a usage handed down by the 
Catholic Church, the habitation of the Holy Ghost. 

What Bede relates of St. Augustin and his monas- 
tic companions, who were sent by Gregory the First 
into Britain, to convert the English to the Christian 
faith, tends to confirm this truth. For when King 
Ethelbert ordered them to be admitted to an inter- 
view — “ They came,” says Bede, “ bearing a silver 
cross as their banner, and a picture of our Lord and 
Saviour; and singing hymns, they supplicated the 
Lord for their own, and the eternal salvation of those 
for whose sake, and unto whom, they had come .” 1 

Pope Gregory the First, who, according to Bede, 
was the apostle of the English nation 2 well explains 
the sense of the Church on the right use of holy 
images. Firstly, in his letter to Secundinus, among 
other things, he has the following : — “ I know, indeed, 
that you do not seek the image of our Saviour to 
worship it as God ; but that, through the recollection 
of the Son of God, you may be inflamed with love 
for Him, on contemplating his image. For we by no 
means prostrate ourselves before it, as before the 
Divinity ; but we adore Him, whom, by means of the 
image, we remember, either in his infancy, his suffer- 
ings, or now seated in glory on his throne. And 
whilst the picture itself, like writing, recalls to our 
mind the Son of God, it either filleth our souls with 
the joys of his resurrection, or melteth them with pity 
for his bitter passion. We have, therefore, directed 


1 Beda, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 1. c.25. 

2 Beda, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 2. c. 1. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 159 

to you two packets, containing the images of God 
the Saviour, of holy Mary the mother of God, and 
of the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul,” &C . 1 

Again, the same distinguished father, reproving 
the inconsiderate zeal of Serenus, bishop of Marseilles, 
thus writes: “ We have been told that you, inflamed 
by an inconsiderate zeal, have broken the images of 
the saints, under the pretence, as it were, that they 
should not be adored. And indeed, that you have 
forbidden them to be adored, we fully approved ; but 
your breaking them we reprehend. Tell me, brother, 
of what priest has such an act as this of yours ever 
been heard 1 Although there were no other reason, 
ought you not to have desisted because of this one con- 
sideration — lest, despising the rest of your brethren, 
you should imagine yourself alone to be holy and 
wise ? For to adore the picture is one thing ; to 
learn, through the history of the picture , what we are 
to adore, is another. And as writing conveys instruc- 
tion to those who read, so doth a picture to the illite- 
rate ; for, in the picture, even the ignorant see the 
pattern they ought to follow, and in it they, who know 
not the use of letters, are enabled to read. Wherefore 
pictures answer instead of reading ; particularly for 
the people at large. And to this consideration, you 
who live amongst the people, should specially attend, 
lest, while rashly inflamed with upright zeal, you be- 
get scandal by a headstrong spirit. What, were 
placed in the churches, not to be adored , but solely for 
the instruction of the minds of the ignorant , should 
not indeed have been broken. And as antiquity has, 
not without reason, allowed the histories of the saints 
to be painted in sacred places, had you but tempered 
your zeal with discretion, you could, doubtless, have 
attained the end you sought ; and instead of scatter- 
ing the c ollected flock, you could have gathered toge- 
ther that which is scattered : thus would the deserved 


i Gregor,, epist. Registro, lib. 7. c. 53, Secundino servo Deincluso. 


160 


white’s confutation 


title of ‘ pastor’ exalt you, instead of the guilt of the 
disperser weighing you down.” And a little farther 
on in the same epistle, advising Serenus how to re- 
move the scandal given to his flock, he adds — “ You 
must say to the people : ‘ If you wish to have images in 
the Church for your instruction , the purpose for which 
they were origionally made, I by all means permit 
them to be both made and used. Then explain to the 
people, that it was not the contemplating of the history 
unfolded in the pictures which displeased you ; but 
the adoration that was unsuitably paid them. And 
soothing their minds with these words, invite them 
anew to be at peace with you. Moreover, should any 
one wish to make images, prevent him not ; but by all 
means guard against the adoration of them. Be also 
diligent, brother, in admonishing the people, that, by 
contemplating the subject of the picture, they should 
excite in their breasts the ardour of compunction, 
and prostrate themselves in adoration of the omnipo- 
tent Blessed Trinity alone .” 1 

But this adoration of which St. Gregory speaks, is 
the adoration of latria , due to God alone, and not the 
honorary adoration , which is the same as veneration, 
and which many fathers mean by adoration when 
they apply it to men , 2 3 * and to holy images . 8 St. Gre- 
gory did not deny that this honorary adoration or ve- 
neration, due to holy images, should be paid them, as 
is plain from another of his epistles, wherein he 
writes as follows : “ Jews coming hither from your 
city, have complained to us, that Peter — who was 
drawn by the will of God, from their superstition to 
the worship of the Christian faith — with the assistance 
of some undisciplined persons, very scandalously, and 


1 Gregor., epist. ex Registro, lib. 9. c. 9., Sereno episcopo. Mas- 
siliensi. 

2 August, tom. 4. lib. 1. Quaest. super Genesim. q. 61. — Vide 
Genes, c. 23. v. 7. 

3 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. 2. Nicenum, act. 7. — Vide Psal. 

98. v. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


161 


without your leave, seized, on the day after his baptism, 
that is on the sabbath, during the paschal festivity, their 
synagogue, situate in Cagliari ; and that he placed 
there an image of Christ our Lord, a venerable cross, 
and the white robe with which he was clothed when 
rising from the font,” &c. And in the same epistle, 
he, a little after, adds : “ But as you have manifested 
your disapprobation of this mistaken conduct, by not 
taking part in it, we, consulting your inclination re- 
specting this affair, nay, rather your judgment, advise 
you to nave the image and cross taken down from 
thence with due veneration, and to have what has 
been forcibly carried away, again restored ; for as 
well as the statute law prohibits the Jews from erect- 
ing new synagogues, so doth it in like manner allow 
them the undisturbed possession of the old ones .” 1 

We read in the liturgy of St. Chrysostom the fol- 
lowing words — “ The priest comes out of a small 
door with the Gospel in his hand, preceded by an 
attendant bearing a lamp. And turning himself to 
the image of Christ placed between the two doors, 
he, with his head bowed down, first repeats this prayer 
in secret, then says it aloud .” 2 

St. Basil, making a confession of his faith, against 
Julian the Apostate, as is quoted by Pope Adrian the 
First, among other things, declares the following — “ I 
also invoke the holy apostles, prophets, and martyrs, 
who supplicate God in my behalf, that through their 
mediation our most benign God may be merciful to 
me, and freely grant me the remission of my sins. 
And for this reason I publicly honour and venerate 
their images. For this usage, which hath been handed 
down to us from the blessed apostles, is not to be for- 
bidden ; but, on the contrary, we erect their images 
in all our churches.” The same Pope Adrian, in the 


1 Gregor., epist. ex Registro, lib. 7. Indict. 2. c. 5. Epist. Januario 
episcopo Caralitano. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 5., Missa Chrysost. 

14 * 


162 


white’s confutation 


epistle just cited, speaking of the apostles Peter and 
Paul, says : — “ They indeed, the princes of the apos- 
tles, who first planted the Catholic and orthodox 
faith, commanded by their writings, as by legal enact- 
ments, that this faith should be preserved, by all who 
were to succeed to their sees, and to continue in their 
faith, until the end of the world. The Church, there- 
fore, preserves and venerates their holy figures, and 
our sacred edifices are even unto the present day 
decorated with, and conspicuous for, their venerable 
images : just as the holy and blessed Pope Sylvester 
testifies to have been the custom among the primitive 
Christians of the orthodox faith,” 1 &c. 

Pope Damasus, in his life of St. Sylvester, says 
that Constantine the Great erected in the Constan- 
tinian basilica, images in honour of Christ, the twelve 
apostles, and the four angels. Here are his words : 
“ In his time (that of Damasus) Constantine Augustus 
erected the following basilicas, which he also embel- 
lished — namely, the Const antinian basilica, wherein 
he placed the following gifts : a silver temple, having 
an image of our Saviour, sitting on a chair, five feet 
in height, and weighing 120 lbs.; images of the twelve 
apostles, with crowns of the purest silver, each five 
feet high and 90 lbs. in weight. He also erected in 
the curve of the arch, an image of our Saviour, sitting 
on a throne, and looking backwards. This image 
was made of the purest silver, was five feet high, and 
weighed 140 lbs. Likewise the silver images of the 
four angels, each five feet in height, and 105 lbs. 
weight, together with Asiatic jewels,” &c. Constan- 
tine, as we read in the same epistle, also erected in 
the place where he was baptized — “A lamb of the 
purest gold, pouring out water, which weighed 30 
lbs. To the right of the lamb, an image of our 
Saviour, made of the purest silver, five feet high, and 


i Tom. 2, Conciliorum Concil. Nicen. 2, act 2, epist. Adriani Pap© 
ad Constantinum Imperatorem et Irenem ejus matrem. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 163 

170 lbs. in weight. On the left of the lamb, a silver 
image of blessed John the Baptist, five feet high, hold- 
ing in his hand an inscription with these words — ‘ Be- 
hold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away 
the sins of the world.’ 

Eusebius relates 8 that the woman afflicted with the 
issue of blood, and who was healed by Christ, * 2 3 erected 
to his honour at Cassarea Philippi, where she lived, a 
brazen statue, bearing his likeness, which was re- 
nowned for miracles, and which was seen by Eusebius 
himself. This statue was held in great veneration by 
the Christians, as appears from their conduct when 
Julian the Apostate threw it down. The fact is thus 
related by Sozonom the historian : “ When Julian was 
informed that there was at Caesarea Philippi, that city 
of Phoenicia, now called Paneas, a renowned statue 
of Christ, which the woman who laboured under the 
issue of blood had erected there, when freed from the 
disease, he knocked it down, and set up his own in 
its place. Whereupon, a violent fire, descending from 
heaven, cut his statue across the breast, dashed the 
head and neck to the earth, and fixed on the ground 
that part which was torn from the breast ; and from 
that day unto the present it remains black, as if burn- 
ed by lightning. The Gentiles at that time dragged 
the statue of Christ with so great violence that they 
broke it : but the Christians, after collecting the frag- 
ments, placed it in the Church, where it still continues 
to be preserved. 4 

Eusebius also, in the passage which we have last 
quoted from that author, declares that he saw the 
images of the apostles Peter and Paul, and that of 


* Tom. 1. Conciliorum, decreta Sylvestri Papee, ox libro pontificali 
Damasi Papae. 

2 Euseb. Caesarcens. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 7, e. 14. Vide Nicepho- 
rum, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 6, c. 15. 

s Mat. ix. 20, 21, &c. ; Mark v. 25, 26, 27, &c. ; and Luke viii. 
43, 44, 45, &c. 

4 Sozom. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 5, c, 20. 


164 white’s confutation 

Christ himself painted in a variety of colours, and 
preserved in pictures. Nicephorus testifies that he, 
too, saw them, when he writes as follows : “ We know 
that there are preserved unto the present day, in 
divers shades and colours, very many images of the 
blessed apostles Peter and Paul, of Christ himself, 
and of his Virgin Mother, who brought him forth 
after a miraculous manner, surpassing the laws of 
nature. And that the apostle Luke, who indeed was 
the first to begin this work, accurately drew them 
with his own hand. After him others of the ancients 
as was right, preserving as it were their deliverers in 
signs and pictures, did the same. And induced, per- 
haps, by the heathen custom, they handed down this 
practice, which they were wont to revere, unaccom- 
panied, however, with any observation as to the neces- 
sity of continuing it. But the Church, guarded, 
and directed by the providence of' God, extended 
more and more this practice, which she derived from 
her founders ; preserving not only the likenesses and 
statues, but also the vestments, staffs, and couches of 
those holy men, for the purpose of eternizing their me- 
mories. Thus, the throne of James was, we know, 
preserved for many ages j 1 and sacred memorials 
clearly testified that he was styled the brother of our 
Lord,* * and created the first bishop of Jerusalem bv 


i De throno Jacobi, vide Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 7, c. 14. 

* “The brother of our Lord.” This expression might, perhaps, 
lead those who are but superficially acquainted with the Holy Scrip- 
tures to imagine that our Lord Jesus had persons related to him in 
that close degree of consanguinity which is commonly understood 
by the word “ brother.” Indeed, I have myself heard well educated 
Protestants, some of whom will in all probability read this note, 
argue, that the Virgin, whom “ all generations shall call blessed,” 
(Luke i. 48) had other children besides our Divine Redeemer ; and 
in support of their arguments they referred to the Gospel of Saint 
Matthew, chap. xiii. 55th and 56th verses, wherein we read — ‘ Is not 
this the carpenter’s son ? Is not his mother called Mary, and his 
brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude : And his sisters 
are they not all with us ?•’ But James, Joseph, and the others here 
mentioned, were not the brothers but the cousins of our Blessed Sa- 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


165 


Christ and his apostles. For his successors venerated 
his throne which had been preserved; openly pro- 
claiming thereby the devotion and zeal with which 
they would follow in the paths of the elect.” 1 — These 
are the words of Eusebius the historian. As the fore- 
going testimonies, and numerous others that can be 
produced, prove the venerable use of holy and sacred 
images to have always existed in the Church ; so do 
they in like manner demonstrate that the fathers of 
the second Council of Nice, the seventh general one, 
justly passed sentence of condemnation on the Icono- 
clasts, who not only railed against the Catholic usage, 
but, because of the usage, raged against the Catholics 
themselves with scurrilous abuse, accompanied with 
other acts of wickedness. And at the present day, 
almost all innovators, treading in the footsteps of the 
iconoclasts, cry out against Catholics, that God en- 
joined in the Decalogue, 4 Thou shalt not have strange 
Gods before me. Thou shalt not make to thyself a 
graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in 
heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those 
things that are in the waters under the earth .’ 2 Ca- 
tholics acknowledge the commandment ; but yet they 
do not understand the idol of a fanatic imagination to 
be its true and genuine meaning. For by this com- 


viour ; for they were the children of Mary, the wife of Cleophas , 
who was sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This is evident from 
the Gospel of Saint Matthew, chap, xxvii. 56, in which we read — 
* Among whom was Mary Magdalen and Mary the mother of James 
and Joseph .’ And the same is again confirmed by the 19th chapter 
and 25th verse of Saint John, wherein we read — ‘ Now there stood 
by the cross of Jesus, his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas .’ Hence 
we clearly see, that Mary the wife of Cleophas, was sister to Mary 
wife of Joseph, the Mother of our Lord and Saviour. Their chil- 
dren, therefore, were what we call cousins german ; and there is no 
one, even partially versed in the languages of antiquity, but knows 
that persons in this close degree of consanguinity were commonly 
called brothers and sisters. For instance Deucalion is made to ad- 
dress his cousin Pyrra by the title of sister — 

“ O Soror, o conjux, o fremina sola superstes.”— P. Ovid. N. Met. lib. 1. 

1 Nicephor. Ilist. Ecclesiast. lib. 6. c. 16. 2 Exod. xx. 3. 4. 

14 * 


166 white’s confutation 

mandment, God forbad the worship of strange gods 
as well in himself as in his images and likenesses. 
How, we ask, does this apply to Catholics, who do 
none of the things forbidden by the above command- 
ment ? They honour the image of Christ, who is not 
a strange , but is The True God. 1 They venerate the 
images of his saints ; but they do not regard and 
worship them as gods, but as the friends of The True 
God. 

In the next place, if we examine the decrees of the 
councils respecting the worship of images, or the 
formulas given to iconoclasts when abjuring their 
error on this head — and these are the sources from 
which the sense of the Church is to be gathered — we 
shall find that the fathers showed, indeed, a due vene- 
ration for holy and sacred images ; but that they paid 
to none, not even to the image of Christ, the worship 
of latria . The fathers of the second Council of Nice, 
the seventh general one, thus define regarding the 
worship of images: “We define with the utmost dili- 
gence and care, that venerable and holy images after 
the manner and form of the venerable and vivifying 
cross, fitly made of colours, and of mosaics, or any 
other material, are to be dedicated, placed, and kept 
in the holy temples of God ; also on the sacred uten- 
sils and vestments ; on the walls and tablets ; in pri- 
vate houses and in the public ways : but, above all, 
the image of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, next 
that of his inviolate Mother, those of the venerable 
angels, and then those of all the saints. That thus, by 
surveying the painted images, all who contemplate 
them may thereby be reminded of the prototypes, and 
brought to the desire of imitating their example ; that 
they may pay them respect and honorary adoration, 
not the true latria, which, according to our faith, is 
suited to the Divine nature alone : but such as is paid 
to the type of the venerable and vivifying cross, and 


i Romans ix. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 167 

to the Holy Gospels .” 1 Constantine, bishop of Con- 
stantia, in Cyprus, an Iconoclast, on renouncing his 
error in the said Council, used the following formula: 
“ I receive and embrace venerable images, but reserve 
solely for the supersubstantia] and vivifying Trinity, 
the adoration which is according to that is, 

the worship due to God .” 2 But to such an extreme 
of madness did the foolish and impious gentiles pro- 
ceed, as to imagine that the works of their own hands, 
the silver and golden images, the wood and stone of 
which Moses speaks, were Gods : ‘ And there,’ saith 
Moses, ‘ you shall serve gods, that were framed with 
men’s hands, wood and stone, that neither see, nor 
hear, nor eat, nor smell .’ 3 And Isaias: ‘ But the re- 
sidue thereof he made a God, and a graven thing for 
himself: he boweth down before it, and adoreth it, 
and prayeth unto it, saying : Deliver me for thou art 
my God .’ 4 And Jeremias : — ‘ Saying to a stock : 
Thou art my father : and to a stone : Thou has be- 
gotten me .’ 5 

Hermes Trismegistus, a noted worshipper of de- 
mons. endeavouring to disguise, as St. Augustin ob- 
serves , 6 this impious folly of the gentiles, used to say 
that there were in images, as in the bodies of the 
Gods, certain spirits allured into them, which possessed 
the power either of hurting, or granting in some mea- 
sure the desires of those who paid them divine honours 
and obsequious worship. But this mask avails no- 
thing: for the spirits said to be in idols, are devils, seek- 
ing to obtain divinity for themselves by some means 
or other. And of them the Psalmist, describing the 


1 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Nicen. 2., General. 7., Act. 7. 

2 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. Nicen. 2., general. 7., act. 3. — Vide 
de hac re tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Moguntin. provincial., c. 41 
& 42. 

3 Deuteronomy iv. 28. 4 Isaias xliv. 17. 

5 Jeremias ii. 27. — See likewise Psalm cxiii. 4, 5, 6. &c. ; and 

Romans i. 25. 

6 August, tom. 5. de Civitate Dei, lib. 8. c. 23 & 24. 


168 


white’s confutation 


gods of the gentiles, which have understanding, and 
are sometimes seen to speak to the gentiles, saith : — 
* All the gods of the gentiles are devils .’ 1 And Paul 
the apostle says : ‘ What then ? Do I say, that whal 
is offered in sacrifice to idols, is any thing ? Or that 
the idol is any thing? But the things which the 
heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to 
God. And I would not that you should be made par- 
takers with devils .’ 2 

Although the faith and practice of Catholics differ 
widely from the impiety and madness of the idolators 
here described ; yet they do not escape the abuse and 
calumny of the iconoclasts, who are justly anathema- 
tized by the second Council of Nice in the words that 
follow: — “We tolerate the use of venerable images, 
and punish with anathema those who will not. All 
who adduce against venerable images those texts of 
sacred Scripture concerning idols, let them be ana- 
thema. Let those who give to venerable images the 
appellation of idols, be anathema. Let such as say 
that Christians adore images as Gods, be anathema. 
They who, knowing it, communicate with persons 
prejudiced against venerable images, or who dishonour 
them, let them be anathema.” And immediately after: 
“ Let such as dare to say that the Catholic Church 
formerly tolerated idols, be anathema .” 3 

We shall conclude this section on the worship of 
images, with the words of the fathers of the Council 
of Sens, who in their decree on the veneration of sa- 
cred images teach as follows — “ Would heretics only 
examine with as much candor as they do curiosity, 
those passages of Scripture, wherein the worship of 
idols and images is forbidden, they would by no means 
raise such a clamour, in order to deter Christians from 
honouring images. For when Catholics venerate the 
holy image of Christ, they do not believe it to possess 


i Psalm xcv. 5. 2 1 Cor. x. 19, 20. 

s Tom^2, Conciliorum Concil. Nicen. 2, general. 7., act 7.seu ult. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 160 

any divinity, neither do they worship it as God ; but 
in order that, through the recollection of the Son of 
God, they may become inflamed with the love of him, 
whose image they fondly desire to contemplate. For 
we by no means prostrate ourselves before the image, 
as before the Divinity ; but we adore him, who, by 
means of the image , is presented to our mind, either 
in his sufferings, or seated on his throne. And whilst 
the picture, like writing, recalls to our minds the Son 
of God, it filleth our souls with joy for his resurrec- 
tion, or melteth them with pity for his passion : but 
with no greater danger of idolatry, than when in the 
name of Jesus every knee is bent , of those who are in 
heaven, and on earth, and of those under the earth. 
For what the word Jesus imparts to the ear , the very 
same doth the image represent to the eye , of the faith- 
ful .” 1 

. SECTION THE FOURTH. 

ON THE VENERATION OF THE RELICS OF THE 
MARTYRS AND SAINTS. 

The Catholic Church has always taught, both by 
doctrine and practice, that honour is to be paid to the 
relics of the saints . 2 * * * * * And why, we ask, should not 
Catholics honour their relics, when they see them ho- 
noured by God ? when they see Him work signs and 
wonders in their presence? For we read in the 
sacred Scriptures that the bones of Eliseus , 8 and the 


1 Tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Senonens provincial. Anno Domini 
1528, decret. 14. de Veneratione sacrarum imaginum. 

2 Basil. Homil. in. Ps. cxv., et Chrysost. tom. 4. comment, in epist. 

ad Romanos, c. 16. ser. 32. — EtGreger. Nazianzen. tom. 2. de vir- 

tute, iambico 18.; et Ambros., tom. 3. sermone 91., de inventione 

corporum sanctorum Gervasii and Prothasii. Et ibidem sermone 

92., in natili sanctorum Martyrum Nazarii et Celsl ; et Hieronym. 
epist. ad Riparium presbyt. ad versus Vigilant. — Et ibidem alia epist. 

adversus Vigilantium : et August., tom. 2. epist. 42, ad Madaurenscs ; 
et epist. 103. ad Quintianum episcopum. — Et tom. 1. Conciliorum, 
Concil. Gangrens. c. 20. ; et Concil. Carthaginens. 5. c. 14. — Et tom. 
2. Conciliorum, Concil. Niccn. secundum general., 7. Act. 7. 

8 * And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and cast 

15 


170 


white’s confutation 


mantle of Elias * 1 2 were renowned for miracles. And 
the holy fathers testify, that at the monuments of the 
martyrs, the dead were frequently raised to life — 
devils tormented — those possessed, freed from them — 
the blind restored to sight — the convalescent and the 
sick to health — and sinners converted to repentance.* 
Nay indeed, as St. Augustin observes and testifies in 
the place last quoted, so numerous were the miracles 
wrought in a short time at the tomb of St. Stephen, 
the martyr, that to recount them all, would require 
many books. 

The fruit and advantage accruing to the faithful of 
the present day — whether they themselves witness 
miracles, or believe them on testimonies worthy of 
belief — are far from inconsiderable ; for they remem- 
ber with greater firmness of faith and consolation 
these words of the Psalm — ‘ Precious in the sight of 
the Lord, is the death of his saints / 3 And also these 
words of St. Paul — ‘ Therefore, my beloved brethren, 
be ye steadfast and unmoveable : always abounding 
in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labour is 
not in vain in the Lord / 4 Whilst Catholics piously 
meditate on these and the like passages of Scripture, 
they become the more inflamed with the desire of 


the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched 
the bones of Eliseus , the man came to life, and stood upon his feet/ 
4 Kings xiii. 21. 

1 ‘ And Elias took his mantle and folded it together, and struck 

the waters, and they were divided hither and thither , and they 
both (Elias and Eliseus) passed over on dry ground.’ 4 Kings iL 
8. ‘ And he (Eliseus) struck the waters with the mantle of Elias, 

that had fallen from him, and they were not divided. And he 
said : Where is now the God of Elias ? And he struck the waters, 

AND THEY WERE DIVIDED HITHER AND THITHER, and EliseUS passed 

over.’ 4 Kings ii. 14. Read the entire of the second and thirteenth 
chapters of the fourth Kings, here quoted. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 3., lib. contra Gentiles, sive in Baby lam Marty r- 
em — Idem tom. 5. Ilomil. 66. ad populum Antiochen — Et August, 
tom. 5., de Civitate Dei, lib. 8. c. 26. ; et lib. 22. c. 8. — Et Gregor, 
lib. 1. Ilomil. 40. de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, homil. 32., et alii 
plurimi. 

3 Psal. cxv. 15. 


* 1 Cor. xv. 58. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


171 


imitating those saints, whose bodies, though sown in 
corruption and infirmity, they see treated with such 
distinguished honour by the God of heaven. 

The nature of the species of veneration paid by 
Catholics to the relics of saints, is distinctly taught 
by St. Jerom, in the following words — “We do not 
worship and adore, I say not merely the relics of the 
martyrs ; but neither do we worship or adore the sun, 
moon, angels, archangels, the cherubim, seraphim, 
or any thing that can be named in this world or in 
the next — lest we serve the creature rather than the 
Creator, who is blessed for ever. But we honour 
the relics of the martyrs, that we may adore Him 
whose martyrs they are. We honour the servants, 
that the honour paid the servants may redound to the 
Master, who saith : — ‘He that receiveth you, re- 
ceived me .’” 1 2 * * * * 

It is admitted by Catholics that relics can be 
abused : and they have therefore provided against 
those abuses by the decrees of councils . 8 But not- 
withstanding all their provisions, innovators, as if 
hurried away by the spirit of error, obstinately choose 
to stray with the heretics, Vigilantius and Eunomius, 
rather than acquiesce in the pure and wholesome 
doctrine of the Church. 

SECTION THE FIFTH. 

ON THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 

The word invocation , speaking strictly, and accord- 
ing to the more general sense of Scripture, is referred 
to God, and so it should be ; for, properly and strictly 
speaking, he alone is the Author and Giver of all the 


1 Hieron. tom. 3., epist. ad Riparium presbyterum, adversus Vigi- 
lantium. 

2 Tom. 2. Conciliorum, Concil. General. Lateran, sub Innocentio 

III. Papa, c. 62. ; et Concil. Trident, sess. 25. de reliquiis sanc- 

torum, &c. Et tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Moguntin. provincial, 

anno 1549, c. 44. ; et Concil. provincial. Cameracens., anno Domini 

1565, c. de Reliquiis. 


172 


white’s confutation 


good we obtain, or desire to obtain, through invoca 
tion : 1 2 and for this reason, using strictly proper terms, 
invocation ought to be referred to Him. In this sense 
it was that St. Paul said : ‘ How will they invoke 
him, in whom they have not believed P that means, 
how will they invoke him as God, which is clear from 
the context. In this sense also it was that St. Augus- 
tin said, the angels should rather be imitated than in- 
voked ; 3 and elsewhere, that the holy martyrs are to 
be named at the altar by the priest, but not invoked . 4 

Sometimes too, though less properly, and, accord- 
ing to the scriptural sense, less frequently, the word 
invocation is referred to the secondary and instru- 
mental causes , through which God is wont to distri- 
bute and bestow his blessings. In this sense the 
prophet Osee said of Israel and Ephraim : ‘ They 
invoked Egypt’ 5 — that is, they sought aid from Egypt. 
For God is accustomed to grant, by means of human 
succour, safety to those in danger, and liberty to the 
oppressed. In this sense likewise Catholics use the 
term invocation, when they teach that the martyrs 
and other glorified saints are to be invoked. For 
they do not invoke them as gods, or as the authors 
of the blessings which they seek ; but beg that through 
their prayers, they would make intercession with the 
Author of all good, for them their suppliants. Neither 
do Catholics ask them to usurp the province of the 
Mediator Christ, or even to assist him ; but merely to 
befriend and assist us by uniting their prayers with 
ours, and offering them to God through Christ : for 
no saint is pleasing to God, but through Christ — and 
the prayers of neither saints nor angels can avail us, 
except through Him. Wherefore, almost every prayer 
of the Church concludes with these words, “ through 


1 1. Paralipomenon xxix. 11, 12.; and 1 Cor. iv. 7.; and James 
i. 17. 

2 Romans x. xiv. 8 August, tom. 5. de Civitate Dei, lib. 10. c. 26. 

4 August, tom. 5., de Civitate Dei, lib. 22. c. 10. 8 Osee vii. 11. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 173 

Christ our Lord.” And in that solemn prayer, called 
the Litany, the Roman Catholic Church expressly 
teaches what is to be ascribed to the Creator and 
what to the creature. For therein, God is invoked 
after one manner ; the saints after a manner widely 
different. God is supplicated thus: — “ O God the 
Father of heaven, have mercy on us — God the Son, 
Redeemer of the world, have mercy on us — God the 
Holy Ghost, have mercy on us.” But when the saints 
are addressed, not their mercy, but their intercession 
is sought ; just as we seek that of our fellow-men in 
this world. For here follows the prescribed manner 
of addressing them. “ Holy Mary, pray for us — 
Saint Peter, pray for us,” &c. And that this pious 
practice of invoking the saints has existed in the 
Catholic Church from the earliest period, is clearly 
demonstrated by the writings of the most ancient 
fathers and doctors, some of whose testimonies we 
shall here subjoin. 

St. Athanasius says : “ To thee we cry out, be 
mindful of us, O most holy Virgin, who hast remained 
a virgin after bringing forth a Son; and do thou, 
who art full of grace, send back to us in return for 
these our poor prayers, great gifts out of the riches 
of thy graces,” &c. And a little after: “ O Mistress, 
and Lady, and Queen, and Mother of God, intercede 
for us .” 1 

St. Basil says : “ Here is aid prepared for Chris- 
tians — namely, a church of martyrs — a triumphant 
army — a band praising God. Often have you endea- 
voured, often have you laboured to procure one inter- 
cessor ; here are forty sending forth one common 
prayer. And as where two or three are gathered 
together in the name of the Lord, God is in the midst 
of them ; who can doubt of His presence where there 
are forty? Let him who is in affliction, fly to their 
succour; and he who rejoiceth, let him supplicate 


l Athanaa. tom. 3. in Evangel, de sanctissima nostra Deipara, 
15* 


174 white’s confutation 

their prayers. The former, that his misfortunes may 
be terminated ; the latter, that his prosperity may be 
continued. To them the mother commends her pray- 
ers in behalf of her children ; and the wife addresses 
her fervent aspirations for the safe return of her ab- 
sent husband, or for his recovery if sick .” 1 

St. Chrysostom, addressing the people of Antioch, 
saith : “ The sepulchres of the servants of Jesus sur- 
pass in splendour the palaces of kings, not by the 
spaciousness and magnificence of the edifices, though 
in this too they excel ; but by what is far superior — 
the zeal of the multitudes who throng to visit them. 
For the emperor, robed in his purple, comes to em- 
brace their sepulchres; and laying aside his pomp, 
stands supplicating the saints to intercede with God in 
his behalf. He whose temples are wreathed with a 
diadem, prays to the maker of sails, and the fisher- 
man, though dead, to become his protectors .” 2 

St. Ambrose, in his book on widows, says : “ The 
angels, who are given us as our guardians,* must be 


1 Basilius, homil. in quadraginta Martyres, versus finem. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 5, homil. 66., ad populum Antiochen. 

* There are but few points of Christian faith more clearly and 
distinctly proved from Scripture, than this now laid down by St. 
Basil. The Sacred Volume abounds with authorities in support of 
this doctrine ; and we shall here adduce a few of them for the peru- 
sal of our readers. 

In the first place, this doctrine is recognized by Jacob on his death 
bed, when by the desire of God, this holy patriarch imparts his 
blessing to the sons of Joseph. For we read in the Sacred text, 
that, placing his hands upon their heads, he thus prays, may ‘ the 
angel that delivereth me from all evils, bless these boys.’ Genesis 
xviii. 16. Again, we read that the angel Raphael conducted the 
son of Tobias on his journey: and that Tobias himself believed in 
the solicitude with which our angels perpetually watch over us, is 
evident from the following scriptural passage, wherein he saith, 
alluding to his son : ‘ For I believe that the good angel of God doth 
accompany him.’ Tobias v. 27. It is also manifest, that as well as 
the angels watch over us on earth, so do they with equal solicitude 
offer up our prayers to God in heaven : 1 When thou didst pray with 
tears,’ saith the angel Raphael to Tobias, ‘ and didst bury the dead, 
and didst leave thy dinner, and hide the dead by day in thy house, 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 


175 


invoked ; so likewise the martyrs, whose bodies seem 
to be left us as a token that we shall have the benefit 
of their patronage. They who with their blood 
washed away every stain of sin, if aught they had, 
can now implore forgiveness for ours. For they are 
the martyrs of God ; they are our guides and the in- 
spectors of our lives and actions. Let us then, weak 
mortals, not blush to have recourse to those interces- 
sors , who themselves experienced the infirmity of the 


and bury them by night, I offered thy prayers to the Lord.' Tobias 
xii. 12. Every person who reads the foregoing verse of Scripture 
will see by it, that the angels are intimately acquainted with each 
act we perform upon earth, even with the very minutest of our con- 
cerns. The Sacred Volume also informs us, that when the prophet 
Daniel had humbled himself by prayer, fasting, and abstinence from 
flesh meat and wine, an angel from God came to instruct, strengthen, 
and console him. Daniel, 10th & 11th chapters. 

As we have now adduced sufficient evidence to support this point 
of Christian doctrine from the Old Testament, we shall next proceed 
to the New, in which the same doctrine is confirmed by Christ him- 
self, when he declares that angels are deputed for our protection. 
For, when cautioning us against giving scandal to the youthful, our 
Divine Lord and Saviour adds : — ‘ See that you despise not one of 
those little ones ; for I say to you that their angels in heaven always 
see the face of my Father who is in heaven.’ Matthew xviii. 10. 

But it is not Catholics who should be required to enter into a de- 
fence of their belief in the efficacy of prayers addressed to God 
through the mediation of angels and saints. Catholics teach the 
doctrine, and they practise what they teach : therefore they are con- 
sistent. But how does the case stand with Protestants ? They teach 
the very same doctrine : hut they do not practise it. Here are their 
own words, which we extract from the Book of Common Prayer, 
feast of Saint Michael and all angels : — “ Mercifully grant, that as 
thy holy angels always do thee service in heaven, so by thy appoint- 
ment they may succour and defend us on earth ." — We feel confident 
that if the bishops and clergy of the Protestant Church would instruct 
their flocks in the principles of their own religion, instead of calum- 
niating and misrepresenting that of others (which practice all en- 
lightened Protestants admit has been, and is, carried to an unchari- 
table excess), two beneficial consequences would result from it. In 
the first place, they would discover that their religion approaches 
nearer to that of the ancient Church than they imagine ; and 
secondly, they would become more reconciled to their Catholic fel- 
low-Christians, and, consequently more observant of this heavenly 
precept of our Divine Redeemer — ‘Love thy neighbour as thyself.’ 


176 


white’s confutation 


flesh, even when they gained the victory over it .” 1 
And again the same St. Ambrose, in his second prayer 
before mass, saith : “ In order that this my prayer 
may prove efficacious, I beg the suffrages of the bles- 
sed Virgin Mary,” &c. — “ I implore the intercession 
of the apostles, who, by imitating the blessed poverty 
of the Mediator, and suffering cruel martyrdom as 
he did, became so exalted, that ‘whatsoever they 
bound on earth was bound in heaven : and whatsoever 
they loosed on earth was loosed also in heaven ;’ 2 and 
that on the last day they shall ‘ sit on twelve thrones 
judging the twelve tribes of Israel .’ 3 I supplicate the 
prayers of the martyrs, who hesitated not to shed 
their blood for the truth, and ‘ loved not their lives 
unto death,’ in order that they may overcome the 
author of death . 4 I implore the prayers of the con- 
fessors, who, whilst they piously lived in Catholic 
unity and peace, endured in daily combat the warfare 
of the devil’s temptations, and the conflicts of here- 
tics ; and who, indeed, to speak the truth, have re- 
ceived the victorious crowns of a protracted and 
secret martyrdom. The prayers of such, O Lord 
God, thou never despisest ; inspire them therefore to 
pray for me : Thou who livest and reignest for ever 
and ever. Amen .” 5 

St. Jerom says : “ Hail ! O Paula ! and now assist 
by thy prayers an old and devoted servant. Thy 
faith and thy works associate thee to Christ; and 
being present with him thou canst the more easily 
obtain thy request .” 6 

St. Augustin, writing to Paulinus, on the regard to 
be entertained for the dead, saith : “ When we call to 
mind the spot where the body of some dear friend is 


i Ambros. tom. 1, lib. de viduis. 2 Mat. xvi. 19. 

3 Mat. xix. 28. 4 Apocalypse xii. 11. 

5 Ambros. tom. 4, precatio secunda proepar. ad Missam. 

6 Hieron. tom. 1, epist. ad Eustochium virginem, epitaphium 
Paul® matris. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


177 


deposited, and that the place happens to be venerable 
for the tomb of a martyr, we in our prayers recom- 
mend the beloved soul to his intercession.” 1 And in 
the 18th chapter of the same book, he says: “It 
appears to me, indeed, that the fact of any person 
being buried in the memory of the martyrs, avails the 
deceased only thus much, that by commending him 
to the prayers of the martyrs, the fervour of the sup- 
plication in his behalf may be thereby increased.” 
And again the same St. Augustin, writing on the sub- 
ject of baptism against the Donatists, saith : “ The 
blessed Cyprian, whose corruptible body is now, in- 
deed, no longer a load upon his soul, and whose 
earthly habitation is no longer a weight upon his mind, 
that museth upon many things, 2 is privileged to behold 
more clearly the truth, to which, by reason of the 
fervour of his love he was entitled to attain. May he, 
therefore, by his prayers assist us, still labouring in 
the mortality of the flesh, as in a darksome cloud ; 
and may he supplicate, that, through the beneficence 
of our Lord, we may be enabled, as far as possible, 
to imitate his virtues.” 3 In his exposition on the Gos- 
pel of St. John, when speaking of the martyrs, Au- 
gustin also saith : — “ We do not at the altar pray for 
martyrs, as we do for the rest of the faithful departed ; 
because they have evinced that love, than which our 
Lord hath declared no man can have a greater. 4 But 
we rather beg of them to pray to God, that we may 
follow in their footsteps.” 5 6 

The Roman pontiff, Gregory the First, in his expo- 
sition on the Canticle of Canticles, explaining these 
words — ‘ I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if 
you find my beloved, that you tell him that I languish 

1 August, tom. 4, de cura pro mortuis ad Paulinum, c. 4. ; et 
ibidem, c. 18. 

2 Wisdom ix. 15. 

3 August, tom. 7, de baptismo contra Donatist., lib. 7, c. 1. 

4 ‘ Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down hi* 

life for his friends.’ John xvi. 13. 

6 August, tom. 9, Exposit. Evangel. Joan., tract. 54. 


178 


white’s confutation 


•with love,’ 1 saith — “ When we disclose our cares to 
holy men, either while they are with us in this world ; 
or lay open our desires to them, after their entrance 
on eternal life, and entreat of them for the love of 
God to offer their prayers to Christ our Lord, and 
present him with our petitions : what more do we do 
than adjure the daughters of Jerusalem, to tell the 
Beloved, with whom they dwell, that we are languish- 
ing with love.” 2 Again, in his homily on the different 
readings of the Scriptures, he says : “ Behold, Jesus 
is about to come as a rigorous judge; the terror of 
the mighty council of his angels and archangels is 
being prepared. In that assemblage our cause is to 
be discussed, and yet we do not now seek as patrons , 
those whom we may on that day have as advocates. 
The holy martyrs are ready to become our defenders ; 
they desire to be canvassed — in a word, they seek 
that they may be sought. By your prayers then seek 
their advocacy; engage them as defenders of the 
charges against you : for the very judges wish to be 
supplicated, lest it should become their painful duty to 
punish you for your offences.” 3 

The historian Ruffinus, describing the expedition 
of the Emperor Theodosius against Eugenius, says : 
“ In making his warlike preparations, he confided not 
so much in arms and weapons, as in the help to be 
derived from fasting and prayer ; neither did he deem 
the vigilance of outguards so good a security, as the 
devotion of whole nights passed in solemn supplica- 
tion. Accompanied by his priests and his people, he 
visited all the places of prayer ; dressed in hair cloth, 
he lay prostrate before the tombs of the martyrs and 
apostles ; and through the intercession of the saints , 
he earnestly besought the aid and protection of Hea- 
ven.” 4 From these and numerous other testimonies 


l Canticle v. 8. 8 Gregor. Exposit. in Cantica Cantic. c. 5. v. 8. 

3 Gregor, lib. 40. Homil. de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, homil. 

32. in fine. 

4 Ruffin. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 2. c. 33. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


179 


which can be produced, it is clear that the practice 
of invoking the saints is Catholic; and therefore, as 
St. Augustin says, — “ It is the most insolvent madness 
to dispute against it .” 1 2 

But besides these high authorities, we read through- 
out the Scriptures, both of the Old and New Testa- 
ment, that holy and just men, while still living in this 
mortal life, were invoked by their fellow men to employ 
their prayers and intercession with God, for the pur- 
pose either of gaining them favours, or of averting 
evils from them .* 

It is therefore right that we, whilst living in this 
life, shopld invoke either the same saints, or any others 
now reigning with Christ ; for as the Church Militant 
constitutes one mystical body with the Church Tri- 
umphant — because of the communion of saints, which 
doctrine all Catholics believe — there can exist no 
doubt but that the saints in heaven have the will and 
the power to aid, by their prayers to God, their breth- 
ren exposed to so many temptations and dangers upon 
earth. Dives, whose bed is fixed in hell , expressed 
great uneasiness lest his brothers should be consigned 
to that place of torments . 3 How then is it possible 
that the charity of the apostle Paul, who reigns with 
Christ in heaven, could have become frozen ? He 
who whilst on earth burned with so great charity to- 
wards his brethren, that he wished to be an anathema 
from Christ, for their sakes . 4 

As the saints, then, are disposed to assist us, be- 
cause they love us ; so they have the power of serving 
us, because they are loved by God. While sojourners 
here with us, they could by their prayers to God effect 
much : and is it not wonderful to find any one mad 
enough to say, with the heretic Vigilantius, that now 
when made partakers with Christ, they can effect less ? 

1 August, tom. 2. epist. 118. Januario, c. 5. 

2 1 Kings vii. 8.; Job xlii. 8, 9, 10.; Isaias xxxvii. 4.; Jeremias 
xxxvii. 3. Also Acts viii. 24.; Romans xv. 30, 31.; 2 Cor. i. 11 ; 
and James v. 15, 16, &c. 

3 Luke xvi. 27, 28. 


* Romans ix. 3. 


180 


white’s confutation 


“ If the apostles and martyrs (says St. Jerom), while 
yet in the body, can pray for others, when they must 
be still solicitous for themselves, how much more 
effectually will they do so, when they have received 
the crowns of their victories and triumphs'? One 
man, Moses, obtains pardon from God for six hundred 
thousand armed men ; Stephen, the imitator of his 
Lord, and the first martyr in the cause of Christ, im- 
plores forgiveness for his persecutors : and, when 
translated to the Kingdom of Christ, shall they become 
less useful ? The apostle Paul tells us, that two hun- 
dred and seventy-six souls, who were in the ship with 
him, were pardoned by his prayers : and now when 
dissolved and with Christ, shall his mouth be closed, 
and he rendered unable to utter one syllable in behalf 
of those, who throughout the whole world believed on 
his preaching ? And shall Vigilantius, a living dog, 
be better than he, a dead lion ? I could consistently 
adopt this opinion respecting the preacher, if I could 
admit that Paul were dead in the spirit.” 1 

The very law of nature itself, as is exemplified in 
the brute creation, dictates that each should seek 
assistance from the one willing and able to afford it. 
Surely, then, as the saints are willing and able to assist 
us, it is our duty to invoke them to intercede with 
God for us. And as to the obtaining our request, 
which is the ultimate object of our invocation, it mat- 
ters little whether the saints whom we invoke, hear 
and understand our prayers, or whether they do not, 
provided we but know (what indeed is beyond all 
doubt) that our invocation is not only known, but 
likewise pleasing to God, and efficacious in obtaining 
for us what we ask. And that such is the case, God 
himself has often testified by miracles, as Theodoret 
relates, when treating of the invocation of the mar- 
tyrs. “ The renowned and conspicuous temples of 
the martyrs,” saith he, “ are of surpassing magnitude 
—are illustrious for every kind of embellishment — and 


1 Hieron. tom. 3, epist. adversus Vitfilantium, 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


181 


diffuse far and wide the splendour of their beauty. 
Nor do we resort to them once or twice or five times 
yearly ; but we frequently assemble there, and gene- 
rally sing praises to the Lord on the day dedicated 
to each of his martyrs. Such as are in health, pray 
for its continuance ; whilst they who are afflicted with 
any disease, pray for relief. Those who have no 
children, pray for them ; and women who are barren, 
beg to become mothers : whilst they who have obtain- 
ed any boon, ask that it be safely preserved to them. 
Such as set out on travels, pray the martyrs to be the 
companions of their way, and the guides of their 
journey ; and they who have come back safe, return 
thanks — not addressing them as Gods , but as celestial 
men , and entreating of them to become their inter- 
cessors. And that such as faithfully invoke them, 
obtain their requests, is clearly attested by the several 
gifts which the persons cured bring in redemption of 
their vows. For some hang up tablets of eyes, others 
of feet, others of hands, made of gold or silver. And 
the Lord accepts their gifts, though small and of little 
value, measuring the gift in proportion to the means 
of the donor. These gifts, then, bear evidence of the 
dispelling of diseases from those who set them up in 
attestation of the cures wrought in their own persons. 
They also demonstrate the virtue of the martyrs who 
are buried there : and the virtue of the martyrs, de- 
clares their God to be the true God .” 1 

Since it is then certain, that God confers many 
benefits on those who implore the suffrages of his 
saints, it matters little to know whether He bestoweth 
them of himself, or through the medium of his angels, 
or through the saints whose suffrages we implore. 
The pious and sensible man studies rather to consult 
by just means for his own necessities, than to waste 
time in investigating subtile and unprofitable questions. 

l Theoderetus tom. 4, lib. de Grsecarum affectionum curatione, ser. 
8, dc Martyribus. 

16 


white’s confutation 


182 


CHAPTER XXV. 

Article the Tiventy-Fourth is examined. 

This article is as follows : “ It is a thing plainly 
repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of 
the Primitive Church, to have public Prayer in the 
Church, or to minister the Sacraments, in a Tongue 
not understood of the people.” 

EXAMINATION. 

This article, if examined according to the Word of 
God, and the custom of the primitive Church, is ut- 
terly repugnant to truth : and, consequently, to force 
it on people, as an article of faith, is sinful. For, in 
the first place, so far as relates to the Word of God, 
the scriptural passage of the apostle Paul to the 
Corinthians , 1 which innovators commonly advance 
against Catholics, and in defence of their own error, 
confirms the custom of the Catholics, refutes the error 
of the innovators, and exposes their extravagant lust 
for calumny and misrepresentation. 

For the design of the apostle, in the passage now 
quoted, is not to condemn, in the public offices of the 
Church, the use of tongues which are not vulgar, as 
Church of England Protestants and others, by cor- 
rupting the passage, erroneously imagine, and lead 
others to believe ; but it is to give a preference to 
the gift of prophecy, above that of tongues, on which 
the Corinthians set an over value, and which they 
foolishly preferred to the more useful gifts. The 
tongues, respecting the gift of which the apostle 
speaks in the passage referred to, were wholly foreign 
and unknown to the people ; so that neither he who 
spoke, nor any person in the Church, could understand 
them. Hence there was no one capable of becoming 


1 I Cor. xiv. 


OP CHURCH-0 F-ENGLANDISM. 


183 


an interpreter : and it was for this reason that the 
apostle, in such case, deemed prophecy the preferable 
gift ; because it tended more to the general edifica- 
tion. And that such were the tongues of which Saint 
Paul speaks, the Catholic interpreters, ancient as well 
as modern, collect from the context of this very chap- 
ter . 1 ‘ For he,’ saith the apostle, ‘ that speaketh in a 
tongue, speaketh not to men, but to God :’ 2 that is to 
say, he who speaketh in a foreign and unknown 
tongue, and ivho hath no interpreter , speaketh not to * 
men, so as to be understood by them, which is the 
proper object of speaking ; but to God, who not only 
understands the words of the speaker, but also in- 
spects the internal disposition of his heart. That he 
does not speak to men, the apostle proves: ‘For no 
man heareth’ 3 — that means, so as to understand what 
he saith : because there is no interpreter. In the thir- 
teenth verse of the same chapter, the apostle also 
adds: ‘And therefore let him that speaketh by a 
tongue, pray that he may interpret .’ 4 The meaning 
is, let him who possesseth the gift of speaking by 
tongues, lest he carry about him an unprofitable gift, 
beseech of God, the bountiful dispenser of gifts, to 
add unto him the gift of interpreting, whereby he may 
be enabled to interpret for the understanding of others, 
that which he himself speaketh in a strange tongue. 
For the gift of speaking in tongues, and that of inter- 
preting them, were separate and distinct gifts . 5 And 
again, the apostle Paul saith : — ‘ But if there be no 
interpreter , let him hold his peace in the Church .’ 0 
From this authority of the sacred Scripture, it is 
again evident, that the gift of tongues was not always 
accompanied by the understanding of them ; for 
otherwise the apostle need not be solicitous about an 
interpreter, since, if he who spoke, understood his 

1 Chrysoat. tom. 4. comment in 1 Cor. c. 14. — Theophylactus in 
locum. — Gagneius scholiis in locum — Estius in locum, et alii. 

2 1 Cor. xiv. 2. 3 1 Cor. xiv. 2. <1 Cor. xiv. 13. 

* 1 Cor. xii. 10. « 1 Cor. xiv. 28. 


184 


white’s confutation 


own words, he could himself interpret them into the 
vernacular tongue. 

From the exposition now given of these texts of 
Scripture, and also from the texts themselves, it is 
manifest that the apostle did not, in the 14th chapter 
of his first epistle to the Corinthians, treat of the public 
prayers and offices of divine worship, that is, of those 
offices which public ministers, in the name of the 
Church, performed for the worship of God ; but that 
*he spoke only of the prayers and spiritual canticles, 
composed by private individuals, possessing the gift 
of the Holy Ghost, and which they used publicly to 
recite or sing in the Church when the faithful were 
assembled for the purpose of spiritual and devotional 
exercises. For, as hath been already observed, these 
persons prayed or sang in a language, which neither 
themselves nor any one else could interpret ; but they 
who presided over the public offices, always could 
interpret, and, from the nature of their office, were 
obliged to interpret to those unacquainted with it, 
the language used in celebrating the offices, as often 
as they considered it would tend to the edification of 
their flocks. And surely, if private individuals could 
discharge certain spiritual offices in the Church, in a 
strange tongue, as it is clear they could do, provided 
they had an interpreter ; J the ministers who presided 
over the public offices of the Church — as they never 
wanted for interpreters — could perform the spiritual 
offices in a tongue, which, though not the vernacular 
one, was, nevertheless, generally understood by the 
people. 

And not only does reason dictate to us that such 
must be the case ; but it is moreover proved by the 
practice of the Church, which is the best interpreter 
of Scripture. For in the Fiast we find the ancient 
liturgies in Greek ; but in the West, we find them in 
the Latin language : and yet it is an indisputable fact, 


1 1 Cor. xiv. 5, 13, 27, 28 and 39. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


185 


that the vulgar language of nations by which those 
liturgies were used, was not always either Greek or 
Latin. For instance, Englishmen know, that in iheir 
own country, the liturgy of the Church, from the days 
of Pope Gregory the First, at which period they were 
converted to Christianity, until the time of King Ed- 
ward the Sixth, was always in the Latin language ; 
and yet Latin was at no one period the vernacular 
tongue of the English nation. Nay, indeed, as Bede 
observes, though Britain was composed of several 
distinct peoples, yet they all used the Latin version 
of the sacred Scriptures. Here follow the words of 
this venerable historian. “ As the Pentateuch, in 
which the Divine Law is written, consists of five dis- 
tinct books, so this realm, composed of the people 
of five different nations, now searches into, and pro- 
fesses, the one immutable science of sublime and 
sovereign truth, in the respective languages of the 
people whereof it is composed — namely, the Angli, 
Britons, Scots, Piets, and Latins ; but yet the lan- 
guage of the last named hath become the common one, 
wherein for all the rest to study, and meditate on, the 
sacred Scriptures .” 1 

St. Cyprian, towards the end of his explication of 
the Lord’s prayer, testifies that in his time the follow- 
ing preface was used in the mass : “ Sursum corda 
raise up your hearts on high; and that the people 
answered: “Habemus ad Dominum:” we have raised 
them up to the Lord . 2 And St. Augustin says that 
in the mass, after “ Sursum corda,” and “ Habemus 
ad Dominum,” the priest immediately added — “ Gra- 
tias agamus Domino Deo nostro let us give thanks 
to the Lord our God ; and that he was answered : 
“ Dignum et justum est :” it is meet and just . 3 From 
this testimony of Augustin, it is plain, that in Africa , 

1 Beda, Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 1. c. 1. 

2 Cyprianus, Explicate Orationis Dominic®. 

8 August, tom. 7. lib. de bono perseveranti®, c. 13. 

16 * 


180 


white’s confutation 


the mass used to be celebrated in Latin.* In his time 
the Psalms too were sung in Latin, as the following 
quotation shows: — “The custom of singing in the fol- 
owing faulty manner, and of which custom the people 
cannot now be broken — ‘ Super ipsum autem jloriet 
sanctificatio mea’ (but upon him shall my sanctifica- 
tion flourish) 1 — detracts in nOwise from the genuine 
sense ; yet the more refined hearer would prefer 
having it corrected, so that not the word ‘floriet,’ but 
‘ florebit’ should be said. And nothing except the 
habit which the singers have contracted prevents 
this correction from being made. Such things, how- 
ever, which do not affect the sense, may without harm 
be overlooked, if any be found unwilling to drop 
them .” 2 And in the same chapter, speaking of prayer, 
he says: “For whether the word ‘ignoscere’ be 
pronounced with the third syllable long or short, 
gives but little concern to him who earnestly implores 
of God the remission of his sins.” In St. Augustin’s 
time, the vulgar tongue of Africa was the Punic, 
which, as he teaches, bore no affinity whatsoever to 
the Latin, but a very great affinity to the Hebrew 
and Syriac languages . 8 


* Although our author quotes these words of St. Cyprian and St. 
Augustin, only for the purpose of showing that the Latin language 
was in their time used in the celebration of the mass ; yet w r e may 
be allowed to remark, that the very same words are at the present 
day used by the Roman Catholic Church in the very same part of 
the holy mass — though upwards of FIFTEEN HUNDRED 
YEARS have since rolled away ! This fact, even of itself, goes far 
to prove the apostolic truth, the antiquity, and the unchangeableness, 
of the Catholic faith and Catholic usages. For let us suppose that 
the holy martyr St. Cyprian, who was born so far back as the 
year of our Lord 261, were again to return to this life; with which 
church, we ask, would he be likely to join communion ? With that 
which still retains the mass that he used to celebrate, and which 
still continues to use the very words that he himself used in celebra- 
ting it; or with that which rejects the mass, the words, and all 
that he was accustomed to revere ! 

1 Psalm cxxxi. 18. 

2 August tom. 3. lib. 2. de doctrina Christiana, c. 13. 

8 August, tom. 7. contra literas Petiliani, lib. 2. c. 104.; tom. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


187 


The Constantinopolitans, also, used the Latin lan- 
guage, in ancient days, when performing their sacred 
offices, as the following epistle of Pope Nicholas the 
First, to the Greek Emperor Michael, distinctly 
proves. “ Behold,” saith Nicholas, “ in the beginning 
of your letter, you style yourself ‘ Emperor of the 
Romans and yet you are not ashamed to call the 
Roman a barbarous language. Behold, you daily, 
nay more, even on your principal festivals, you blend 
with the Greek, as a something precious, this lan- 
guage which you term “ barbarous” and “ Scythian,” 
as if it would be discreditable to you, should you not 
use, in your obsequies and offices, a language which 
you but imperfectly understand.” A little further on, 
he again says : “ And moreover, if you entertain such 
an abhorrence for the Latin language, make it your 
business to endeavour to discard it from your churches. 
For they say that the church of Constantinople, first 
recites the lessons of the apostles and evangelists in 
Latin , and then indeed translates them into Greek, for 
the benefit of the Greeks. But as this solitary impiety 
is thought to be the only one yet wanting to the church 
of Constantinople, in order to complete the measure of 
its iniquity, it remains for you alone to effect its ac- 
complishment .” * 1 

Moreover, the Western church always adminis- 
tered the sacraments in Latin, as appears from the 
ancient Latin manuscripts, in which the public forms 
for administering them are contained, and which are 
still preserved in the archives of many of the Western 
nations. Yet Latin was not at any time the vulgar 
tongue of England, Germany, Gaul, and other king- 
doms, where the Latin forms were universally adopt- 
ed. Nay, though it has for many centuries ceased 


9. exposit. in Evangel. Joannis, tract. 14 & 15. ; tom. 10. de ver- 
9. his Apostoli, eerm. 26. 

i Tom. 2, Conciliorum, epist Nicolai primi Pap® ad Micha- 
clem Imperatorem. 


188 


white’s confutation 


to be the vulgar tongue of Italy, and even of Rome ; 
yet the custom of administering in Latin has not 
ceased : and as it is retained there, so is it likewise 
retained at the present day, in the other countries 
holding communion with the Church of Rome. And 
many and persuasive indeed are the reasons that 
recommend the continuance of this custom. For, in 
the first place, though the Latin language is not the 
vernacular tongue of any particular people, yet it is 
more general than any language that is ; and for this 
reason, whether we consider the case of the clergy, 
or that of the flocks, it is the best adapted for pre- 
serving the communion of different nations. Secondly, 
by the use of the Latin language, which is chiefly in- 
debted for its preservation to this custom of the 
Church, another important advantage is gained ; for 
by means thereof, various nations not only hold one 
common doctrine, but also, when assembled in council , 
are enabled to deliberate more maturely, and to pro- 
vide with more circumspection and wisdom for the 
common good. Thirdly, in order that the danger of 
change and corruption be avoided, it is expedient to 
have the sacraments everywhere administered in set 
words, and after the same manner ; and this w ill con- 
tinue to be done the more easily, by all the clergy 
using the same language : but it would become more 
and more difficult, were they to adopt the various 
national languages, which are every day undergoing 
alteration. Finally, though many are ignorant of the 
Latin language ; yet there are also many who under- 
stand it well : and they who are unacquainted with it, 
can be, and are instructed, by those who discharge 
the public offices of religion, in all those matters 
which it is expedient they should know. 


OF CHU11CH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


189 


CHAPTER XXVI. 

Examination of the Twenty-Fifth Article . 

This article, which is entitled “ Of the Sacra- 
ments, ” among other things, contains the following : 
“ There are two sacraments ordained of Christ our 
Lord, in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the 
Supper of our Lord.” 

“ Those five commonly called sacraments ; that is 
to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, 
and Extreme (Jnction, are not to be counted for sa- 
craments of the Gospel, being such as have grown, 
partly of the corrupt following of the apostles, partly 
are states of life allowed in the Scriptures ; but yet 
have not like nature of sacraments with Baptism, and 
the Lord’s Supper, for that they have not any visible 
sign or ceremony ordained of God.” 

EXAMINATION. 

Whereas the Catholic Church — ‘ which is the 
pillar and the ground of truth ,’ 1 — hath defined in a 
general legitimate, and confirmed council, where its 
voice is most respected, and its authority recognized, 
that there are seven sacraments of the new law — 
namely, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, 
Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony ; 2 and 
whereas it hath pronounced anathema against such 
as assert that there are either more or less than seven 
— or even that any of them is not verily and properly 
a sacrament : Y ou are, therefore, exposed, and most 
deservedly so, to the punishment of this anathema, 
so long as you continue to infuse into the minds of 
the miserable creatures whom you have seduced, the 
leaven of innovators, instead of the wholesome food 
of Catholic doctrine. And you are still more culpa- 


1 1 Timothy iii. 15. 

2 Concil. Trident., sees. 7, de sacramentis in genero, can. 1. 


190 white’s confutation 

ble for this reason — because another general legiti- 
mate council hath also defined, that the number of the 
sacraments is seven , 1 and this it did before Luther teas 
born , who, if he were not the original inventor, w r as 
at least the chief and active propagator of this leaven 
of unsound doctrine. And so strange and detestable, 
indeed, did this spurious doctrine appear in the eyes 
of the English, when Luther first began to maintain 
it, that Henry the Eighth, then king of England, took 
up his pen in defence of the doctrine of the Church 
on the seven Sacraments. His defence of the sacra- 
ments justly earned for him the title of “ Defender of 
the Faith.” — This title you have hitherto admired in 
his successors ! — Would to God, that you equally ad- 
mired the cause for which it hath been bestowed ! 

Catholics hold that the sacraments of the New Law, 
properly so called, are sensible signs, instituted by 
Christ in his Church, for the purpose of signifying, 
and of conferring grace on such as duly and worthily 
receive them. And your definition of sacraments in 
general, as laid down in your catechism, is not dif- 
ferent from this.* * We shall now distinctly prove in 

i Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florentin. in decreto Eugenii Pap® 
ad Armenos. 

* We extract from the Protestant Catechism, contained in the 
Book of Common Prayer, the following questions and answers to 
which our author here refers : — 

Question — “ How many sacraments hath Christ ordained in his 
Church ? 

Answer — “ Two only, as generally necessary to salvation ; that is 
to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.” 

Question — “ What meanest thou by this word Sacrament ?” 

Answer — “ I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and 
spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means 
whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof!” 

From the foregoing definition, it is evident that the three essentials 
required by the Church of England, in order to constitute a sacra- 
ment, are — firstly, and of course chiefly, that it be “ ordained by 
Christ himself ;” secondly, that it be accompanied by “ an outward 
and visible sign;” and thirdly, that the Divine promise of “an in. 
ward and spiritual grace ” be attached to this external sign. 

We hope that our readers, and more particularly those amongst 
them who are in communion with the Church of England, will bear 


OP CH URCH“OF-ENGL AN DISM 


191 


the following sections, that Confirmation, Penance, 
Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are sa- 
craments of the New Law, properly so called. 

SECTION THE FIRST. 

ON THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION. 

As it is not only necessary to be born again of 
water and of the Holy Ghost, 1 or cleansed from sin 
through Christ; but also to be endued with the virtue 
of the Holy Ghost, and, that we may use the words of 
the apostle, — ‘ To be strengthened with might by the 
Spirit, unto the inward man,’ 2 in order that we may 
have resolution freely and fearlessly, in presence of 
the enemies of the faith, to confess Christ crucified 
and his doctrine, and be enabled to continue firm, 
amid all dangers and temptations : Christ ordained 
that there should be another sacrament after baptism. 
This he did for the purpose of teaching us, that, be- 
sides being regenerated, we stand in need of the more 
abundant grace of the Holy Ghost to confirm and 
strengthen us ; and he instituted this sacrament, as the 
channel through which this grace should be commu- 
nicated to our souls. 

From the nature of its effect, it is called the sacra- 
ment of confirmation ; because it confirms the grace 
received in baptism, or because it confirms the per- 
son baptized in the grace he then received. It is to 
this effect of the sacrament, that St. Paul alludes, 
when he says : * Now he that confirmeth us with you 

in mind the Protestant definition of a sacrament, which we have now 
quoted ; for at the close of the succeeding chapters, which treat of 
the five additional sacraments of the Catholic Church, and which 
/they reject, we shall put it to the candour of all impartial and enlight- 
ened Church-of-England men to say, if each of them has not attach- 
ed to it all the essentials required by the Protestant definition ? And 
when they shall see those essentials attached to each of the seven 
Sacraments of the Catholic Church, it will then behove them to con- 
sider, if they are safe in rejecting sacraments established on Divine 
authority, and taught by the Church of God in all ages, and in all 
countries, 
i John iii. 5. 


« Ephesians iii. 16. 


192 


white’s confutation 


in Christ, and he that hath anointed us, is God.’ 1 It 
is also, in the language of Scripture, called the sacra- 
ment of the imposition of hands, 2 from the rite by 
which it is celebrated. Christ, in the Gospel of St. 
Luke, promised the grace of this sacrament to his 
disciples, when he said : ‘ And I send the promise of 
my Father upon you ; but stay you in the city, till 
you be endued with power from on high.’ 3 He also 
renews the same promise in the Acts, saying : ‘Wait 
for the promise of the Father, which you have heard 
by my mouth. But you shall receive the power of 
the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be 
witness to me in Jerusalem,’ 4 &c. And He, whose 
power is not limited to a sacrament, bestowed upon 
his disciples, on the day of Pentecost, without the 
medium of any sacrament, the grace which he had 
promised them. For we read in the commencement 
of the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles : — 
‘ And when the days of the Pentecost were accom- 
plished, they (the disciples) were all together in one 
place. And suddenly there came a sound from hea- 
ven, as of a mighty wind coming, and it filled the 
whole house where they were sitting. And there 
appeared to them parted tongues as it were of fire, 
and it sat upon every one of them. And they were 
all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they began to 
speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy 
Ghost gave them to speak.’* The grace thus bestowed 
on the apostles, was not confined merely to the gift 
of tongues, to that of healing, or the like, which are 
conferred for the benefit of others ; but it was the 
grace of the Holy Ghost, strengthening them to per- 
severe firmly in the profession of the faith, as these 
words of Christ clearly express — ‘ But stay you in the 
city, till you be endued with power from on high.’ 5 
And accordingly, they who, before the descent of the 


i 2 Cor. i. 21. 

4 Acts i. 4 & 8. 


2 Hebrews vi. 2. 
* Acts ii. 2, 3, 4. 


s Luke xxiv. 49. 
5 Luke xxiv. 49. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 193 

Holy Ghost, were overpowered with fear — who, fly- 
ing away, deserted and denied Christ — and locked 
themselves up in their houses 1 — are, after the Holy 
Ghost is given them, armed with a contempt of life, 
even unto martyrdom . 2 

This gift of the Holy Ghost was not promised and 
given to the apostles alone ; but, in them, to all the 
children of the New Testament according to a certain 
measure, as the apostle Peter proves from the prophet 
Joel , 3 through whom the Lord had promised that he 
would pour out the Spirit upon all flesh. And St. 
Peter again, in more explicit terms, confirms this, 
when he says to the faithful and contrite of heart : 
‘ Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the 
name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins : 
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 
For the promise is to you, and to your children, and 
to all that are afar off, whomsoever the Lord our 
God shall call .’ 4 Behold, here the apostle proclaims 
a certain gift of the Holy Ghost, that had been pro- 
mised through the prophet Joel, which gift is distinct 
from penance and the remission of sins, and is subse- 
quent to baptism. The promise of this gift extends to 
all the faithful, and to their children , and to all whom- 
soever the Lord shall call to the faith : that is, the 
effect of this promise is prepared for them, and it is 
in their power to become partakers of it. 

For as the principal cause for which God promised 
and gave the Holy Ghost to the primitive Church, 
always exists in the Church — for the faithful at all 
times require the grace of the Holy Ghost to strength- 
en them in maintaining and confessing the faith with 
constancy, and overcoming the threats and torments 
of tyrants; therefore the gift always remains with her, 
and is conferred on the faithful by God, through the 


• Mark xiv. 50 & 71 ; and John xx. 19. 

8 Acts ii. 36 ; Acts iii. 13, 14, 15 ; Acts iv. 8, 9, 19, 20. 
s Acts ii. 17 ; and Joel ii. 28. * Acts ii. 38, 39. 


17 


194 


white’s confutation 


ministry of bishops, by the same rite as that whereby 
the apostles formerly conferred it. For the Scrip- 
tures plainly show, that the imposition of hands was 
the established mode by which the apostles gave the 
Holy Ghost to those who were previously baptized . 1 2 
And they (the apostles) transmitted to their succes- 
sors the same sacrament to be administered by them, 
as the Catholic Church has always taught both by 
her doctrine and practice. Now, as it is impossible 
that man can, of his own authority, unite grace to a 
certain sign, but God alone who is the Author of 
grace, it is, therefore, certain that the apostles did 
this by the authority of Him, whose Spirit infallibly 
guided them in whatever regarded the edification of 
the Church. “Are you ignorant,” saith St. Jerom, 
“ that it is the custom of the Church to impose hands 
on those who have been baptized, and thus to invoke 
the Holy Ghost ? Do you require to know’ in what 
part of the Scriptures this is written ? In the Acts of 
the Apostles. But though there existed no scriptural 
authority, the consent of the whole world on this 
point should give it the force of a commandment. 
For many other things also which are observed by 
tradition in the Church, have obtained the authority 
of the written law,” &c. 

St. Augustin also testifies, in the following words, 
that confirmation is a sacrament. “For the giving 
of the Holy Ghost is not now accompanied by tem- 
poral and sensible miracles, as was formerly the case, 
in order to recommend the new faith, and extend the 
Church in its infancy. For who now expects that 
they on whom hands are imposed, that they may 
receive the Holy Ghost, are suddenly to begin speak- 
ing in tongues ? But we know that the divine charity 
is invisibly and secretly infused into their hearts by 
the bond of peace, so that they can say : 84 The charity 

1 ‘Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the 
Holy Ghost.’ Acts viii. 17. — See also Hebrews vi. 2. 

2 Hieron. tom. 3. adversus Luciferianos. • Romans v. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 195 

of God is poured abroad in our hearts, by the Holy 
Ghost who is given to us. 1 And again this same holy 
father says — “ In the first ages, the Holy Ghost de- 
scended on believers, and they spoke in tongues which 
they had not learned, according as the Holy Ghost 
gave them to speak. The signs were suitable to the 
occasion ; it was necessary that the Holy Ghost should 
be thus made known in all languages , as a sign that 
the Gospel of God was to be preached in all the lan- 
guages of the earth : the object was accomplished and 
the sign passed away. But is it expected at the 
present day, that they on whom hands are imposed 
in order that they may receive the Holy Ghost, are 
to speak in tongues ? or when we have imposed hands 
on those children, does any one of you expect they 
should speak in tongues? And when he sees that 
they do not, is there one amongst you so wicked of 
heart as to say — they have not received the Holy 
Ghost, for if they had, they would speak in tongues, 
as was formerly the case?”” 2 3 These are the words of 
the great and learned Augustin. 

And St. Cyprian, who flourished before either Au- 
gustin or Jerom, speaking of the baptism of heretics, 
says : “ As they had been lawfully baptized, and 
thereby made members of the Church, it was not ne- 
cessary that the sacrament should be repeated : but 
the only thing which they needed was done for them 
by Peter and John, who, by prayer and the imposition 
of hands, invoked and poured upon them the Holy 
Ghost. The same thing is also done by us at the pre- 
sent day, when they who are baptized in the Church 
are presented to the bishops, that through our prayers 
and the imposition of hands, they may receive the 
Holy Ghost, and be made perfect by the seal of the 
Lord/’ 

The fathers of the Council of Eliberis, after pro- 


1 August, tom. 7. de baptismo contra Donatist. lib. 3. c. 16. 

2 August, tom. 9, Exposit. in Epist. Joannis, tract. 6. 

3 Cyprianus, epist 73. ad Jubaianum de hsereticis baptizandis. 


106 white’s confutation 

nouncing the baptism of a layman in cases of neces- 
sity to be valid, subjoin : “ If he survive, let him be 
brought to the bishop, that by the imposition of hands 
he may be made perfect .” 1 We could add to these 
many other testimonies ; but from the few already 
adduced, it is clear that the same sacrament is now 
administered by our bishops, as was formerly admi- 
nistered by the apostles. The accessory gift of 
tongues, it is true, and every other like gift, formerly 
bestowed by the imposition of hands, for the purpose 
of planting and nourishing the faith of the Church, 
has now ceased : yet the genuine and proper effect of 
the sacrament, namely, — the spiritual strength (as the 
general Council of Florence explains it), still remains, 
and always will remain . 2 It is moreover to be ob- 
served, that the imposition of hands, which is the sub- 
ject of which we are now treating, is not simple, but 
is accompanied with unction. The hand is imposed, 
but that hand at the same time anoints ; and the doc- 
trine and practice of the Catholic Church, from the 
very time of the apostles, demonstrate that hands 
were not otherwise imposed when administering this 
sacrament. Wherefore, when the ancient fathers, 
in speaking of it, express the unction only (which they 
often do), they, nevertheless, implicitly signify the im- 
position of hands. And again, when they mention the 
imposition of hands only, they at the same time sug- 
gest and refer to the unction. 

St. Augustin, in his third volume on the Trinity, 
when discoursing of Christ, saith : “ And it is more 
clearly written of him in the Acts of the Apostles — 
‘ How God anointed him with the Holy Ghost .’ 3 Not 
indeed with visible oil, but with the gift of grace, 
which is signified by the visible ointment with which 
the Church anoints those who have been baptized .” 4 

1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Eliberinum, can. 38. 

2 Tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. in decret. Eugenii iv. Papre 

ad Armenos. 

8 Acts x. 38. i August, tom. 3. de Trinitate, lib. 15. c. 26. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 197 

St. Pacianus, bishop of Barcelona, whom St. Jerom 
enumerates in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers, 
says : “ At the font we are purified from sin ; the 
Holy Ghost is poured upon us by chrism ; but the one 
and the other we receive from the hand and mouth 
of the prelate .” 1 And Theodoret, speaking of the 
heretic Novatus, says : “ His successors have made 
still further additions to his teaching. For they repel 
from the sacred mysteries those who have married a 
second time ; they banish from their conventicles all 
mention of penance ; and to those whom they baptize, 
they give not the holy chrism. Wherefore the fathers 
have ordained, that all persons belonging to this he- 
resy, who become united to the body of the Church, 
shall be anointed .” 2 

We shall also quote the testimony of Saint Cyprian 
on this subject, who saith — “ It is also necessary that 
he who has been baptized should be anointed, that, 
receiving the chrism, he may become the anointed of 
God, ana have the grace of Christ within him .” 3 Ter- 
tullian also elegantly, though briefly, touches on the 
rites of this sacrament. We shall first quote his 
words on this subject of baptism, where he says : — 
“ The flesh indeed is washed, that the soul may be 
cleansed.” And immediately after, speaking of the 
sacrament of confirmation, he adds : “ The flesh is 
anointed, that the soul may be consecrated. The flesh 
is sealed, that the soul may be strengthened. And in 
order that the soul may be illuminated by the Spirit, 
the body is overshadowed by the imposition of hands .” 4 
These are the words of Tertullian. Also Clement of 
Rome, treating on baptism, says : “ Let the Bishop 
afterwards anoint with ointment the persons who 
have been baptized .” 5 Dionysius the Areopagite,speak- 

1 Tom. 4, Biblioth. Pat. Pacianus Ser. de baptismo. 

a Theodoretus. tom. 4, hoereticarum fabularum. lib. 3, de Novato. 

3 Cyprianus in Concilio cum aliis multis, epist. 70. 

4 Tertul. lib. de resurrectione earn is. e. 8. 

« Clemens Romanus, Constitut. Apost., lib. 3, c. 16. 

17 * 


198 


white’s confutation 


ing of a person previously baptized, says : — “ Again 
they conduct him to the bishop, who, signing the man 
with oil divinely consecrated, (a 6 e Otw ^ yl ^9 
t ov uv8ga o^aytcfa^itvoj) declares him tit to become a par- 
taker of the most blessed eucharist.” And again he 
says : “ The unction of the Divine Spirit, perfecting 
those on whom it is poured, copiously bestows grace 
on such as are previously initiated by the sacrament 
of baptism.” 1 St. Fabian, the Roman pontiff and mar- 
tyr, states, that after Christ our Lord had supped, and 
washed the feet of his disciples, he taught them how 
to make the chrism. 2 Wherefore it is probable, that 
it was at that time also Christ instituted the sacrament. 
St. Basil reckons the making of chrism, and the an- 
ointing with it, among those apostolical traditions 
which are equally efficacious to piety, as what are re- 
vealed in the Divine Scriptures. 3 * Finally, we shall 
proceed to confirm this doctrine by the testimonies 
of councils. The fathers of the Council of Laodicea 
declare, “ That they who have been baptized, should 
receive the chrism of the Church, and be made par- 
takers of the Kingdom of Christ.” The Council of 
Florence declares chrism to be the matter of this sa- 
crament. 5 And concerning chrism, the Council of 
Trent defines thus: “ Should any one say, that they 
who ascribe a virtue to chrism in the sacrament of 
confirmation, do injury to the Holy Ghost — let him 
be anathema.” 6 

That your leaven is quite different from the whole- 


1 Dionysius Areopag. Hierarch. Ecclesiast. c. 2, paragraphum 7. ; 
et ibidem c. 4, paragraphum 11. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. 2s Fabiani Papce, ad omnes Orien* 
tales Episcopos. 

3 Basilius lib. de Spiritu Sancto, ad Amphilochium Iconii Episco- 
pum, c. 27. 

* Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Laodicen. can. 48. 

5 Tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. in decreto Eugenii IV. ad 
Armenos. 

« Concil. Trident, sess. 7, de Confirmatione, can. 2. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENOLANPISM. 199 

some doctrine of the Catholic Church, is now plain 
from what has been already said. Yet before con- 
cluding this section, we shall briefly show how badly 
your doctrine coincides with your practice. For not- 
withstanding the doctrine put forth by you in this 
article, you, by a decree of your church , are bound to 
administer confirmation every year. Catholics call 
this confirmation of yours, a political confirmation ; 
because you reject the sacramental The persons to 
be confirmed in the Protestant Church are to be pre- 
sented by their godfathers or godmothers to the 
bishop, who is appointed sole minister of this your 
confirmation. Then the bishop, in a prescribed form 
of prayer and benediction, administers it to them, on 
their bended knees , once only, and this under a set 
form. Before the imposition of hands, he, praying 
for those about to be confirmed, supplicates God to 
strengthen them with the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, 
and to increase the manifold gifts of his grace in those 
to whom he granted the full remission of their sins in 
baptism. And after the imposition of hands, the 
bishop, in a supplication to God, declares that he, 
after the example of the apostles , laid his hands on 
them, in order that, by this sign, he may ensure to 
them the Divine grace and favour. It is also en- 
joined in the Protestant Church, that no person shall 
be admitted to the Holy Communion until he be first 
confirmed. Now, pray, what is the meaning of all 
this? God alone can efficaciously promise grace, 
and institute a rite or sign, whereby it can be confer- 
red. How, then, can you by the mere imposition of 
the hands of your bishops, secure the Divine grace 
to those who have been baptized, when you do not 
believe that God has promised it through the medium 
of this rite? You must, therefore, admit one or other 
of these conclusions — either you dissemble your faith 
in this article ; or your confirmation is but an impious 
mockery of the God of Heaven. 


200 


white’s confutation 


SECTION THE SECOND. 

ON THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE. 

“ If all Christians,” says the Council of Trent, 
“entertained that gratitude for God which would pre- 
serve them constantly in the justice received through 
his goodness and grace in baptism ; there would have 
been no need of instituting any other sacrament for 
the remission of sins. But because God, rich in his 
mercy, knew the frailty of our nature ; he established 
a remedy whereby those who, after baptism, surren- 
der themselves to the slavery of sin, and the dominion 
of the devil, may regain life — namely, the Sacrament 
of Penance, by which the benefit of Christ’s death 
may be applied to their souls .” 1 

The sacrament of penance was instituted by Christ, 
principally, at that time when, after his resurrection, 
he breathed upon his disciples, saying : ‘ Receive ye 
the Holy Ghost : Whose sins you shall forgive, they 
are forgiven them : and whose sins you shall retain, 
they are retained .’ 2 “ It is delightful,” says Pope 
Gregory the First, “ to reflect on the sublime glory, 
to which the disciples, called to duties so humble, have 
been exalted. Behold, not only are they rendered 
secure so far as regards themselves, but they also 
receive power to loose the bonds of others. The so- 
vereignty of the heavenly judgment is allotted fo 
them: so that, acting in the place of God, they can 
retain the sins of some, and loose those of others .” 3 

Moreover, this power was communicated, not only 
to them, but also to their successors in the priesthood. 
“ Temporal princes,” says St. Chrysostom, “ possess, 
it is true, the power of binding, but this power is 
limited to the body : whereas the sacerdotal chain, of 
which I speak, reacheth the soul, and extendeth even 

1 Concil. Trident, sess. 14. c. ] . ; De necessitate et institutione Sa. 
cramenti PcBnitentire. 

2 John xx. 22, 23. 

8 Gregor, lib. 40. Homil. de divcrsis lectionibus Evangelii, homil. 
26. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


201 


to heaven. So that whatever the priests do here be- 
low, God ratifies above : the master confirms the sen- 
tence of his servants. For what can you call this 
but a complete power over the concerns of heaven, 
granted them by God ? ‘ Whose sins you shall retain,' 
saith our Divine Lord, ‘ they are retained.' What 
power, I ask, can be greater than this I 1 " These are 
the words of Chrysostom. And St. Jerom says: 
“ F ar be it from me to utter any thing derogatory to 
those, who, succeeding to the apostolic ministry, can 
produce the body of Christ by virtue of the sacred 
words they pronounce : for to them we are also in- 
debted for being Christians. They possess the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven : they in a certain manner 
judge before the day of judgment." 2 And again, the 
same St. Jerom, explaining in another of his works, 
the following words of the Gospel : ‘ Amen, I say to 
you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be 
bound also in heaven ; and whatsoever you shall loose 
upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven,' 3 saith — 
“As our Lord hath pronounced that he who will not 
hear the Church, is to be regarded as a ‘ heathen ' 
and a * * publican and as he who despiseth his bro- 
ther, may secretly think within himself, or perhaps 
reply — If you despise me, I also despise you ; and if 
you condemn me, you shall likewise stand condemned 
by my sentence : for this reason it was that Christ 
gave the above power to his apostles, in order that 
they who are condemned by them or their successors 
may know that the human is ratified by the Divine 
sentence ; and that whatsoever they bind on earth, 
is equally bound in heaven also." 4 These are the 
emphatic words of St. Jerom. And indeed, the 
fathers of the entire world have at all times believed, 


l Chrysost. tom. 5. lib. 3., de Sacerdotio. 
a Hieron. tom. 1. ad Heliodorum de vita eremitica. 
a Mat. xviii. 18. 

* Hieron. tom. 9. lib. 3. comment, in Mat. c. 18. 


202 


white’s confutation 


that this power of loosing and binding sins was, as 
the Council of Trent declares, communicated to the 
apostles and their legitimate successors, for the pur- 
pose of effecting the reconciliation of the faithful who 
fall into sin after baptism ;* and the Catholic Church 
justly banished from her communion, and condemned 
as heretics, the Novatians, for obstinately denying this 
power. 

But as this power belongs properly to Christ, and is 
only delegated and committed by him to his ministers 
in the priesthood ; 8 it is therefore to be exercised 
not at their pleasure, but according to the will of 
Christ our Lord. “For then,” as Pope Gregory the 
First says, “ then is the absolution of the priest effec- 
tual, when it is in accordance with the will of the 
eternal Judge .” * 3 And the Eternal Judge (as the 
Council of Trent declareth 4 ) gave to the apostles, 
and their successors, the power of remitting the sins 
of those whom they should see penitent, and accusing 
themselves of the crimes into which they fell after 
baptism. Hence it follows, that it was the will and 
intention of God, that all who should be desirous of 
obtaining pardon of the mortal sins they commit after 
baptism, should come and disclose to them, as to their 
judges, the true state of their consciences. Where- 
fore it follows, that penance is properly called a sacra- 
ment of the New Law: for, according to the institu- 
tion of Christ, it requires a sensible (or perceptible) 
sign of grace, namely, repentance on the part of the 
sinner revealed to the priest by signs; and also the 
grace of the remission of sins, annexed to this effica- 
cious sign by Christ, and which is to be obtained 
through the absolution of the priest 

And though the efficacy of this sacrament consists 
principally in the absolution of the priest, as being the 

i Concil. Trident, sess. 14. c. 1. 2 2 Cor. v. 18. 

3 Gregor, lib. 40, Homiliarum de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, 
homil. 26. 

« ConciL Trident sese. 14. c. 2 & 6. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 


203 


form ; yet there are acts of the penitent, viz., contri- 
tion , confession , and satisfaction , which, in a certain 
sense, constitute its matter. And as these acts are, by 
God’s institution, required of the penitent, in order to 
complete the sacrament, and render the remission of 
his sins full and perfect; they are, therefore, called 
parts of the sacrament of penance. But, in order 
that these several parts may be the better understood, 
we shall briefly treat of each separately, and in their 
regular succession. 

Subsection the First. — Of Contrition. 

As contrition is an internal act, it must be revealed 
by some external sign, in order that it may be called 
part of a sacrament, which is something perceptible 
to the senses. Neither should the priest absolve any 
person inconsiderately, or until he shall have clearly 
perceived the sinner’s contrition. * And they healed,’ 
saith God himself, ‘ the breach of the daughters of 
my people disgracefully, saying : Peace, peace : when 
there was no peace .’ 1 “ For,” as Isidore of Hispalis 
says — “ He healeth the breach disgracefully, who 
promiseth security to the sinner, and to him who is 
but insufficiently penitent .” 2 Many things indeed are 
required to constitute true contrition. In the first 
place, the sinner must conceive a detestation for sin, 
not for this or that particular sin ; but for all sins, 
because they are of their nature offensive to God. 
* Now therefore saith the Lord : Be converted to me 
with all your heart.’ ‘ Cast away from you all your 
transgressions, by which you have transgressed .' 4 And 
in this same sense, the apostle James saith : $ Now 
whosoever shall keep the whole law, but offend in one 
point, is become guilty of all .’ 5 For it is evident that 
our repentance is false, so long as we overlook many' 
other sins, and repent of one sin only ; or so long as 

i Jeremias viii. 11. 2 Isidor. Hispal. lib. 2, sententiarum, c. 13. 

s Joel ii. 12. * Ezechiel xviii. 81. 5 James ii. 10. 


204 


white’s confutation 


we repent of one in such a manner as not to abandon 
all. “ The way to do penance,” says St. Gregory, 
“ is to weep over the sins we have committed, and 
not again to commit those things that shall require 
our tears. For he who bewaileth some sins in such 
a manner as still to commit others; either falsely 
pretendeth that he is doing penance, or as yet know- 
eth not how. For what doth it avail a man to weep 
for the sin of luxury, and yet pant with the thirst of 
avarice ? Or what doth it avail him now to bewail 
the crime of anger, and yet feel mortified by the 
gnawings of envy V n The best repentance indeed is 
a new life, but no one entereth with sincerity on a 
new life, w 7 ho doth not repent and feel ashamed of 
the old one. ‘ What fruit therefore,* saith Saint Paul, 
addressing the Romans, ‘ had you then in those things 
of which you are now ashamed V 1 2 Augustin, in con- 
sidering this passage of Scripture, says: “The apostle 
tells us that they who in his time were converted to 
the faith, felt ashamed, not of the spiritual exercises 
they then performed, but of their past sins. Let the 
Christian, then, not dread this confusion : if he feel 
not this, he shall feel an eternal confusion.” — And 
again, considering the 6th chapter and 21st verse of 
Saint Paul to the Romans, Augustin saith : “ For 
there is a certain temporal confusion, a salutary per- 
turbation of the mind, w r hich is experienced when, 
looking back on its past sins, it shuddereth with horror 
at the retrospect, feels ashamed of the horror, and 
correcteth that which is the cause of its shame.” 3 

Secondly, our contrition must be bitter and sorrow- 
ful as was that of David : ‘ I am become miserable,* 
saith David, ‘ and am bowed down even to the end : 
I walked sorrowful all the day long. I roared with 
the groaning of my heart. For I am ready for 

1 Gregor, lib. 40, Homiliarum de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, 
homil. 34. 

2 Romans vi. 21. 

8 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. xxx. concio prima, eonsiderana 
verba Apostoli, Rom. vi. 21. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


205 


scourges : and my sorrow is continually before me.’ 1 
‘ A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit : a contrite 
and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.’ 2 
And in the Gospel of Saint Luke, Christ our Lord 
saith : ‘The spirit of the Lord is upon me : wherefore 
he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; 
he hath sent me to heal the contrite of heart'* Augus- 
tin, explaining these words of the Psalm — ‘ Who 
healeth the contrite of heart, and bindeth up their 
bruises,’ * 4 says : “ Behold, how are the dispersions of 
Israel collected, that the contrite of heart may be 
healed ! They who are not contrite of heart, are not 
healed. But what means to be contrite of heart ? 
Know, my dearest friends, that you must be contrite, 
before you can be healed. For it is said in many 
other parts of Scripture, and particularly in this pas- 
sage, where a certain inspired Psalmist cried out with 
the expression which we employ : * For if thou hadst 
desired sacrifice, I would have given it.’ 5 Yes! 
David says to God — ‘ If thou hadst desired sacrifice, 
I would indeed have given it : but with burnt offerings 
thou wilt not be delighted.’ What then? shall we 
remain without the oblation of sacrifice ? Hear what 
the Psalmist desires thee to offer. He continues, and 
saith — ‘A sacrifice to God is a troubled spirit, a con- 
trite and humbled heart God doth not despise.’ ” — 
And a little after Augustin again says : — “ He healeth 
the contrite of heart, he therefore healeth the humbled 
of heart, he healeth those who confess, and those who 
exercising a rigid judgment upon themselves, become 
their own punishers.” 6 

Thirdly, true and perfect contrition requires a con- 
version to God, as the object of our supreme love, and 
that we should prefer him to all things else. That 


1 Psalm xxxvii. verses 7, 9, 13. 2 Psalm 50. v. 19. 

8 Luke iv. 1 8. Also see Isaias lxi. * Psalm cxlvi. 3. 

5 Psalm 50. v. 18. 

8 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psalm cxlvi. 

18 


206 


white’s confutation 

such is the contrition God requires as a justification 
of the sinner, the following passages of Scripture 
clearly prove. — ‘And when thou shalt seek there the 
Lord thy God, thou shalt find him: Yet so, if thou 
seek him with all the affection of thy soul.” — ‘You 
shall seek me and shall find me : when you shall seek 
me with all your heart.’* — ‘He that loveth father or 
mother more than me, is not worthy of me : and he 
that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not 
worthy of me.’ 3 — ‘ If any man come to me, and hate 
not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and 
brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he 
cannot be my disciple.’ 4 

Pope Gregory the First, explaining these words of 
Saint Luke — ‘Many sins are forgiven her, for she 
hath loved much,’ 5 * saith: “Brethren, what do we be- 
lieve love to be, but fire? And what do we believe 
sin to be, but rust? Wherefore the Scripture saith : 
‘Many sins are forgiven her, for she hath loved much.’ 
As though it were distinctly to say: She wholly con- 
sumes the rust of sin ; because she ardently burns 
with the fire of love. For the rust of sin is consumed 
ill proportion as the heart of the sinner is inflamed 
with the great fire of charity.” 0 And St. Augustin 
sa)'s : “No man doth penance effectually, who doth 
not entertain a hatred for sin, and a love for God. 
When you so repent, as to dislike in your heart what 
was before agreeable to you in life ; and feel grieved 
in your soul at what was before delightful to you in 
the body, then you may justly cry out to God, and 
say: ‘To thee only have I sinned, and have done 
evil before thee.’ ” 7 8 These are the words of the learned 
and holy Augustin. 9 

i Deuteronomy iv. 29. 2 Jeremias xxix. 13. 3 Mat. x. 37. 

4 Luke xiv. 26. See likewise 3 Kings viii. 48 ; Joel ii. 12, 13, &c.; 
1 Cor. xvi. 22 ; and also 1 John iii. 14, 15, &c. 

3 Luke vii. 47. 

3 Gregor, lib. 40. Homil. de diVersis lectionibus Evangelii, homil. 33. 

7 Psalm 50. v. 6. 

8 August, tom. 10. de Tempore, ser. 7. eeu ser. 3. in natali Domini. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


207 


Fourthly, the Catholic doctrine teaches, that con- 
trition includes a fixed determination to lead a better 
life : for the Scripture saith: ‘Turn away from evil 
and do good. 1 2 — Cease to do evil : Learn to do well.’ 
And then these words are subjoined : ‘Though your 
sins be as scarlet, they shall be made white as snow : 
though they be red like crimson, they shall be white 
as wool .’ 8 Here, the remission of sins is promised 
after good works shall, at least, have been entered 
upon with earnestness and with a resolution to accom- 
plish them. Let us again hear the Scripture speak: ‘Cast 
away from you all your trangressions, by which you 
have transgressed, and make to yourselves a new 
heart, and a new spirit .’ 3 And St. Paul, in his Epis- 
tle to the Ephesians, saith, — ‘But you have not 
so learned Christ ; If so be that you have heard him, 
and have been taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, 
to put off, according to the former conversation, 
the old man who is corrupted according to the desires 
of error. And be ye renewed in the spirit of your 
mind : And put on the new man, who, according to 
God, is created in justice and holiness of truth .’ 4 

Finally, as the hope of pardon, reconciliation, and 
whatsoever else is defined by the Catholic Church as 
necessary to constitute true contrition, are sufficiently 
understood from what has preceded, we now hasten 
to explain the second part of the sacrament of pe- 
nance. 

Subsection the Second . — Of Confession. 

Saint Paul teaches us, in the sixth chapter of the 
first Corinthians, and again in the fifth chapter of his 
epistle to the Galatians, that grievous, or mortal sins, 
into which the faithful often fall after baptism, exclude 


1 Psalm xxxiii. 15. 

2 Isaiasi. 16, 17, 18. — Vide tom. 3. Conciliorum, Concil. Florentin. 
nx Decret. Eugcnii ad Armenos; et Concil. Trident, sees. 14. c. 4. 

3 Ezechiel xviii. 13. See also Psalm xxxiii. 15, and Isaias i. 16, 17, 

< Ephesians iv. 20, 21, 22, 23, &c. 


208 


white’s confutation 


from the Kingdom of God ;* and that the right to that 
kingdom cannot be regained, until those sins are first 
remitted. It is moreover to be remarked, that Christ, 
who is both God and man, hath established for those 
who fall into such sins, no mode of obtaining the re- 
mission of them, save in the tribunal of the Church. 
For the sentence pronounced by Him is universal — 
‘Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven 
them : and whose sins you shall retain, they are re- 
tained / 2 It is in vain, therefore, for any man to flatter 
himself with the idea of obtaining remission of his 
sins, who hath not secured the sentence of this tribu- 
nal in reality, or at least in desire. Whence Pope 
Leo the First says : “God in his manifold mercy hath 
been so considerate with regard to the weakness of 
human nature, that, not only through the grace of 
baptism, but also by the medicine of penance, may 
the hope of eternal life be recovered. Thus they 
who have abused the blessings conferred on them in 
baptism, can, by a voluntary self-condemnation, obtain 
the remission of their offences : yet the Divine good- 
ness hath so arranged, as that this concession of God 
can be obtained only through the supplication of his 
priests. For the Mediator between God and men, 
the man Christ Jesus, gave to the rulers of his Church 
the power of prescribing acts of penance for thosq 
who confess ; and also the power of admitting them 
through the gate of reconciliation, when purified by a 
wholesome satisfaction, to a participation of the sacra- 
ments. And in this work our Saviour himself is un- 
ceasingly engaged ; neither is he ever absent from 
those duties, the discharge of vrhich he committed to 
his ministers, when he said : ‘ Behold, I am with you 
all days, EVEN TO THE CONSUMMATION OF 
THE WORLD/ ” 3 These are the words of Leo/ 

St. Augustin, who flourished before the time of Leo, 

J 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10.; and also Galatians v. 19, 10, &c. 

2 John xx. 23. 3 Mat. xxviii. 20. 

4 Leo, epist. 91, ad Thcodorura Episcopum Florojuliens, c. 2. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDI3M. 


209 


thus addresses such as fall into mortal sin : “ Do 
penance, such as is done in the Church, that you may 
have the benefit of the prayers of the Church. Let 
no man say to himself: 4 1 do it privately’ — ‘ I do it 
before God’ — ‘ God who pardons me, knows that I do 
it in my heart.’ Was it, then, without reason that 
Christ pronounced : ‘Whatsoever you shall loose upon 
earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.’ 1 2 W as it with- 
out reason that the keys of the kingdom of heaven 
were given to the Church of God? Do we make 
void the Gospel of God ? Do we make void the 
words of Christ? Do we promise you any thing 
which he denies? Do we deceive you?” 8 And St. 
Cyprian, who lived still earlier than either Augustin 
or Leo, thus writes to Pope Cornelius: “God in his 
paternal affection and divine clemency did not permit 
— for it would not have been right — that the Church 
should be closed against those who knock, and the 
cheering hope of salvation denied those who with 
tears come to implore it ; because in that case they 
would, on departing this life, be thrust into the pre- 
sence of the Lord without communion and peace — 
whereas He who gave the law, hath allowed, that 
whatsoever should be bound on earth, should be bound 
also in heaven ; and that whatsoever should, in the 
first instance, be loosed in the Church here below, 
should be loosed there likewise.” 3 4 

As it is then certain, that the apostles and their 
successors in the priesthood, were appointed by 
Christ the judges of those who should fall into mortal 
sin after baptism ; 4 and as it is also clear that they 
could not pronounce judgment in a cause which they 
had not heard and investigated, or prescribe suitable 
penances, if sinners were only to declare their of- 
fences to them in a general manner, and not with pre- 

1 Mat. xviii. 18. . 

2 August, tom. 10, lib. quinquaginta Homiliarum, homil. 49. 

8 Cyprian, epist. 54, ad Cornelium. 

4 Vide Concil. Tridentin, sees. 14, c. 5., 4 De Confessione.’ 

18* 


210 


white’s confutation 


cision and each one separately : it therefore follows, 
that it was the vrish and intention of Christ our Lord, 
that penitents should make confession of every mortal 
sin, with which, after a diligent examination of them- 
selves, they should feel their consciences to reproach 
them. In addition to the authority of the Sacred Scrip- 
tures, we find that the writings of the most ancient 
fathers, and the decrees of the earliest councils, 
clearly point out to us the use and necessity of sacra- 
mental confession ; for we easily collect from them, 
that its use in the Church is most ancient, in as much 
as it has been received from the apostle — and also 
that its necessity, as the means of obtaining absolution 
from sin, has been at all times distinctly admitted. 
For these reasons, we shall now adduce some quota- 
tions from the ancient fathers and councils in con- 
firmation of this doctrine. 

We shall commence with the authority of St. Au- 
gustin, who, in his Homily on true penitents, saith : 
“And I tell you moreover, that not only should a man 
keep himself free from those vices after penance, but 
likewise before it, while he is in health : for if he delay 
his conversion to the end of life, he knoweth not 
whether he shall be able to receive penance, and 
have it in his power to confess his sins to God and a 
priest .” 1 These are the words of the great and 
learned Augustin. And St. Jerom, writing on this 
subject, says: “If the serpent, the devil, secretly 
bite a man, and infect him with the poison of sin, un- 
known to every one ; and if he who is wounded 
remain silent, and doth not do penance, or consent to 
confess his wound to his brother and master: the 
master in that case, who hath a tongue to heal, will 
not find it easy to relieve him. For if the patient be 
ashamed to confess his wound to the physician, the 
latter cannot heal with medicine that which he knows 


1 August, tom. 1 0, lib. quinquaginta Homiliarum, homil. 41, do 
vere poenitentibus. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 211 

nothing about.’’ 1 St. Chrysostom also, in his second 
book on the priesthood, saith: “A pastor needs to 
have great prudence — nay, he would require six hun- 
dred eyes, in order to enable him to inspect the human 
mind thoroughly. For as it sometimes happens that 
people despond, and rush into despair of their salva- 
tion, merely because they dislike the bitterness of the 
medicine prescribed for them ; so you will find others 
who, because they were not assigned punishments 
proportionate to their crimes, become negligent, in- 
crease in wickedness, and proceed at an accelerated 
pace in their career of sin. Consequently, all these 
things must be minutely sifted and examined by the 
pastor ; and when he hath carefully scrutinized them, 
then — and not till then — should he apply suitable and 
proportionate remedies to each : and this caution he 
should observe, lest, perhaps, his labour be all in 
vain.” 2 Again, contrasting the corporal with the 
spiritual physician, Chrysostom saith : “ Let you act 
in like manner — expose your wound to the priest,” 
&c. 3 

St. Gregory of Nyssa, towards the end of his ser- 
mon addressed to those who are too severe in their 
judgment and condemnation of others, in discoursing 
of the priesthood, saith: “For this reason, let you 
repose a greater confidence in him, who hath begotten 
thee in God, than in those by whom thou hast been 
corporally begotten. Confidently disclose to him thy 
hidden sins. Lay open to him the secrets of thy soul, 
as thou wouldst disclose hidden wounds to a physician. 
He will have a regard both for thy honour and thy 
health. Parents are more interested for the honour 
of their children, than the children themselves. For 
as the glory of the childreth redoundeth to the pa- 
rents, so likewise do their demerit and disgraceful 

1 Hieron. tom. 7. comment, in Ecclesiast. c. 10. — Vide tom. 9. lib. 
3, comment in Mat c. 18. 

2 Chrysost tom. 5, de Saeerdotio, lib. 2. 

8 Chrysost. tom. 5, homil. 3, ad populum Antiochenum. 


212 


white’s confutation 


conduct. Brethren, the end of life is uncertain : let 
us then diligently prepare for our departure from it. 
For, whereas they who attend to their bodily health, 
take medicine before the dog days, lest the humours 
within them be corrupted, and engender diseases ; so 
it is most absurd on the part of those who have any 
regard for the salvation of their souls, not to antici- 
pate the uncertain day of death, and the violence of 
that excruciating fire, which burns to eternity, and 
admits of no mitigation .” 1 These are the solemn 
words of Gregory. 

St. Cyprian, who flourished prior to all the fathers 
whom we have now quoted, severely rebukes those 
persons, who, after denying the faith, dared to ap- 
proach the altar — “ Before,” as he says, “ they had 
expiated their offences, confessed their crimes, clean- 
sed their consciences by sacrifice and the hand of the 
priest, and before they had appeased the injury done 
their indignant and threatening Lord. These people 
imagine that to be peace, which some persons desire 
to impose upon them as such. It is not peace, but 
war,” &c. And in the same work, he afterwards 
teaches us that we must make a confession of our 
secret sins. Here follow his w r ords — “ Finally, there 
are some persons, who, as remarkable for great faith 
as for a holy fear, although not upbraided by con- 
science with the crime of having participated in the 
(Pagan) sacrifices, or wfith having procured false 
testimonials, pretending they had thus complied ; yet 
in case they even thought of so doing , this they ac- 
knowledge with grief and candour to the priests of 
God ; making a full and clear confession of their con- 
science — laying open the burden of their mind — and 
seeking a salutary remedy for their wounds, however 
slight and inconsiderable : for they know that it is 
written in the Scripture — ‘God shall not be mocked .’ 2 
And a little further on St. Cyprian addresses the fol- 


Gregor. Nyssen, Oratio de pcenitentia. 


2 Galatians vi. 7. 


OF CIIURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


213 


lowing exhortation to all faithful: “Dearest brethren, 
I implore of you all to confess your faults, whilst that 
God whom you have offended still spareth life to you 
— whilst confession is still within your reach — and 
whilst the satisfaction and remission granted by the 
priest, are yet acceptable in the sight of the Lord .” 1 
Such are the w r ords of Cyprian. 

And Origen, in his second Homily upon Leviticus, 
treating of the manifold remission of sins, saith : 
“ There is besides, a seventh, but it is a severe and 
arduous mode of obtaining the remission of sin — 
namely, by penance : when the sinner washeth his 
couch with his tears — when his tears make his bread 
day and night — and when he blushes not to lay open 
his sin to the priest of the Lord and seek for medi- 
cine ; but when, like King David, he exclaims : 2 ‘I 
said, I will confess against myself my injustice to the 
Lord ; and thou hast forgiven the wickedness of my 
sin.’ ” 3 And again, in another volume of his Homi- 
lies, Origen, explaining these words of the Psalm — 
“For I will declare my iniquity ,’ 4 saith : “We have 
frequently observed that the declaring of iniquity, 
meaneth the confession of sin. See then how the Di- 
vine Scripture teaches us, that we must not inwardly 
conceal our sin. For as they who have indigested 
food, or humour, or phlegm within them, experience 
relief on vomiting forth those heavy and noisome bur- 
dens by which the stomach is oppressed ; so in like 
manner, they who are in sin, and who conceal it, feel 
oppressed and almost suffocated by the phlegm or 
humour which it creates. But if the sinner become 
his own accuser, and approach the tribunal of confes- 
sion, he, at the same time, vomits forth his sin, and 
wholly dispels the cause of his disorder. Yet, let him 
be careful in choosing his confessor. Let him select 
as the physician, to whom he is about to expose his 


l Cyprianus lib. de lapsis. 

3 Origen tom. l,homil. 9, super Levitio. 


2 Psalm xxxi. 5. 

4 Psalm xxxvii. 19. 


214 


white’s confutation 


weakness, a man who knows how to become weak 
with the weak, to weep with the sorrow! ul, and who 
understandeth the science of condolence and fellow 
feeling ; for lie can with safety follow the prescription 
and advice of one, who hath already proved himself 
a skilful and tender-hearted physician. And even 
should the physician consider your disease of such a 
nature as that it ought to be publicly exposed in pre- 
sence of the congregation, in order that others may 
be thereby edified, and you yourself the more easily 
healed, you must consent thereto : but this should be 
done after much deliberation, and upon the well con- 
sidered advice of such a physician as above de- 
scribed .” 1 

Finally, St. Clement of Rome, in his first Epistle to 
St. James, the brother of our Lord, declares that the 
apostle Peter taught the doctrine of sacramental con- 
fession in these words : “ But should it happen,” saith 
he, “ that envy, infidelity, or any of those evils enu- 
merated above, secretly steal into a man’s heart, let 
him not, if he have any regard for his soul, be ashamed 
of confessing them to his director, that he may, 
through the word of God, be healed by him and his 
salutary counsel, whereby he may, by sound faith 
and good works, be enabled to escape the pains of 
eternal fire, and attain the reward of everlasting life.” 
And further on in the same epistle, he says : “ He 
(Peter) taught, that man should keep a perpetual 
watch over the actions of his life, and have God ever 
present before his eyes : that he should firmly believe, 
that wicked thoughts entertained in his heart, give 
immediate offence to Christ, and are to be disclosed 
to the priests of the Lord .” 2 

It would be too tedious to copy out verbatim the 
canons of all the councils, in which the doctrine of 
sacramental confession is taught. We shall, however, 

1 Origen tom. 2. homil. 2. in Psal. 37. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epistola prtma dementis ad Jacobum fra- 
trem Domini. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


215 


notice some of the most ancient of them, which, if 
the careful and learned reader will peruse at his lei- 
sure, he will find to comprise this doctrine either in 
express terms, or in the inference to be drawn from 
them . 1 

Subsection the Third . — On Satisfaction. 

When Catholic doctors speak of Satisfaction , they 
commonly mean thereby, the desire of appeasing an 
offended God by a voluntary chastisement of our- 
selves ; or else, the voluntary punishments and other 
pious works offered to God as a kind of compensation 
for the injury done him by sin. Yet this satisfaction 
or compensation made to God by the sinner, is not, 
nor can it be, made according to perfect and absolute 
justice. For whatever we are, we are God’s; what- 
ever we have, we hold from God; when we offend 
against him, we injure. the infinite Good, as far as in 
us lies : whereas we ourselves are only finite , and 
whatever we possess is but insignificant. No man, 
therefore, unless through the mediation of some ac- 
ceptable offering, can satisfy God for the sins com- 
mitted against him. This is the doctrine laid down 
by the fathers of the Council of Trent, who, when 
defining on this subject, say : — “ But the satisfaction 
which we make for sin, is not ours in such a manner, 
as though it were not through Christ Jesus. For we 
who can do nothing of ourselves, as of ourselves, can, 
with the co-operation of Him who strengtheneth us, 
do all things. Man , therefore , has nothing wherein to 
glory ; but all our glory is in Christ — in whom we 
live — i n whom w r e have merit — in whom we make 
satisfaction ; bringing forth fruits worthy of penance, 
which fruits have their efficacy from Him, are offered 


1 Vide tom. 1. Conciliorum, Concil. Carthaginens. 3, c. 31, etConcil. 
Carthaginens. 4, c. 74.; Concil. Milevitan. c. 23.; et tom. 2, Concili- 
orum, Concil. Cabilonens. 1, c. 8.; et Concil. Cabilonens. 2, tempore 
Caroli Magni, c. 32, 33, & 45. ; Concil. Vormatiens. c. 25. ; et Concil. 
Quinisext. editionis Parisiens. tom. 5, c. 102. 


210 


white’s confutation 


by him to the Father, and through him are accepted 
of by the Father .” 1 These are the forcible and dis- 
tinct words of the Council of Trent. 

Moreover, no sinner is received by the Father 
who is not first prepared for reception by the satisfac- 
tion of penance: for penancys is the plank by which man 
is saved since the calamitous day whereon he forfeited 
the Divine grace. ‘ Be converted/ saith God in Fze- 
chiel, ‘ and do penance for all your iniquities : and 
iniquity shall not be your ruin .’ 2 And in the Apoca- 
lypse, the warning voice of God salutes us thus : — ■ 
‘ Be mindful therefore from whence thou art fallen : 
and do penance, and do the first works. Or else I 
come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its 
place, except thou do penance .’ 3 Now, true penance 
includes the forementioned satisfaction ; for it is by 
satisfaction that the Prophet Joel, or rather God 
through the prophet, describes penance — ‘Now there- 
fore saith the Lord : Be converted to me with all 
your heart, in fasting , and in weeping , and in mourn- 
ing. And rend your hearts and not your garments, 
and turn to the Lord your God .’ 4 And St. Paul the 
apostle teaches, that the sorrow which is according 
to God worketh revenge . 5 And the apostle St. Janies 
also describes penance by works of satisfaction. 

‘ Cleanse,’ saith he, 4 your hands, ye sinners : and purify 
your hearts, ye double-minded. Be afflicted, and 
mourn , and weep: let your laughter be turned into 
mourning , and your joy into sorrow . Be humbled in 
the sight of the Lord, and he will exalt you .’ 6 “ All 
iniquity,” saith St. Augustin, “ be it little or great, 
must be punished, either by penitent man, or by an 
avenging God. But he in whom it produces sorrow 
punisheth himself. Therefore, brethren, if we seek 
the mercy of God, let us punish our sins. God cannot 

1 Concil. Trident, sess. 14, c. 8, desatisfactionis necessitate et fructu. 

2 Ezechiel xviii. 30 8 Apocalypse ii. 5. * Joel ii. 12, 13. 

6 2 Cor. vii. 11. 8 James iv. 8. 6. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 217 

have mercy on all who work iniquity, as if he de- 
lighted in sin, instead of punishing it. Sin, indeed, is 
punished, either by man, or by God. Do you wish 
that God should not punish thy sin ? Then punish it 
thyself. For thou hast done that which cannot pass 
unpunished ; but rather let it be punished by thyself, 
that thou mayest do what is written in the Psalm : 
4 Let us come before his presence in confession.’ 1 
What means, let us come before his presence in con- 
fession? Before he determines on punishing thee, 
do thou anticipate him by confession, and punish thy- 
self. Let him not find aught to punish, for when 
thou punishest iniquity, thou dost justice; and God 
therefore will have pity on thee, as he now finds thee 
doing justice. What means, doing justice ? It means 
that thou shouldst hate in thyself, that which God 
also hates, in order that thou mayest begin to please 
him, by punishing in thyself that which is displeasing 
to him. For sin cannot escape unpunished, because 
the words written in the 6th verse of the 58th Psalm 
are true : ‘ Have no mercy on all them that work 
iniquity.’ ” 2 These are the words of Augustin. 

In the next place we must observe, that it does not 
suffice for us simply to punish sin ; but that the sin- 
ner is also required to inflict condign punishment on 
himself, as God declares in Deuteronomy, where we 
read — ‘ According to the measure of the sin , shall the 
measure also of the stripes be .’ 3 * — And again we re^d 
in the Apocalypse — ‘As much as she hath glorified 
herself, and hath been in delicacies, so much sorrow 
and torment give ye to her.’ 1 The apostle Paul an- 
nounced both to Jews and Gentiles, as we read in the 
twenty-sixth chapter and twentieth verse of the Acts 
— ‘ that they should do penance, and turn to Go 1, 
doing works worthy of penance.’ 5 And before St. 

1 Psalm xciv. 2. 

2 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in primam partem Psalmi 58, — Vide 
etiam enarrationem in Psal. 50. 

3 Douteronomy xxv. 2. * Apocalypse xviii. 7. 5 Acts xxvi. 20. 

19 


218 


Wiliiii’s CONFUTATION 


Paul, John the Baptist prophesied, saying : ‘ Bring 
forth therefore fruit worthy of penance. 9 1 St. Gregory 
the First, explaining these words of Saint John the 
Baptist, which we read in the Gospel of Luke, saith: — 
“ On these words we have to remark, that the friend 
of the bridegroom not only warns us to bring forth 
fruits of penance, but fruits worthy of penance. For 
to bring forth the fruit of penance is one thing, fruit 
worthy of penance is another. But that we may speak 
of fruits worthy of penance , you must know that he 
who hath committed nothing in violation of the law 
is in justice allowed to enjoy all that the law permits 
of : and thus he can do pious works without relin- 
quishing, if he so choose, the things that are of the 
world. But, on the contrary, if any man have fallen 
into the crime of fornication, or perchance, what is 
still worse, into that of adultery, he must deny himself 
what is lawful, in proportion as he remembers to have 
perpetrated that which was unlawful. For the fruits 
produced by the good works of the man who hath 
transgressed in a lesser degree, and of him who has 
transgressed in a greater, should by no means be 
equal; neither should those of the man who hath 
committed no crime, and of him who hath committed 
only a few, and of another who has plunged into nu- 
merous crimes, be equal. This one verse of Scrip- 
ture therefore : ‘Bring forth fruits worthy of penance/ 
is suited to the conscience of every one : for each 
may, through penance, acquire by his good -works, a 
profit proportionate to the losses he has entailed upon 
himself by sin/’ 1 2 

And St. Chrysostom, who flourished before Gre- 
gory, considering these same words, which are also 
contained in the third chapter of the Gospel of Saint 
Matthew, saith : “ Let us do penance, and gain not 


1 Luke iii. 8. 

2 Gregor, lib. 40, Homiliarum de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, 
homil. 20. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


219 


only the forgiveness of our sins, but also the glory of 
rewards. But by penance I mean, not only absti- 
nence from our former sins, but also that we be filled 
with the fruits of good works. Bring forth, saith the 
Gospel, fruits worthy of penance. But how shall we 
be able to bring forth fruit ? By doing such good 
works as are of a nature opposite to our sins. For 
instance — you who have plundered the property of 
others, begin now to give away your own. You who 
have been long a fornicator, now deny yourself the 
lawful right of marriage, and by frequently remaining 
chaste for a few days together, meditate upon per- 
petual continence. You who have already injured 
any one by word or deed ; now compensate him by 
your blessing — and strive to reconcile by kindnesses 
and even by benefits, those who injure you. For, 
merely to pluck the arrow from the wounded body, 
doth not suffice to ensure health : we must also apply 
healing remedies to the wound. You who have here- 
tofore wallowed in luxurious delicacies and drunken- 
ness : now, by way of amends, fast and drink water, 
that you may escape impending famine. And you 
who with immodest eyes have admired the beauty of 
another’s wife — now learning caution from your sad 
experience — look not at all on woman. In a word, 
turn away from evil, and do good.” 1 These are the 
words of the renowned and learned Chrysostom. 

The mode of giving penance according to the an- 
cient custom of the Church, was to prescribe a quan- 
tity and quality of punishment, commensurate with 
the quantity and quality of the sins committed. 
Wherefore, St. Cyprian says : “ In proportion as we 
have transgressed, so let us now weep. Let long- 
continued and searching medicine be applied to the 
deep-seated wound. Let not the penance fall short 
of the offence.” 2 And St. Ambrose, addressing the 


l Chrysost. tom. 2, homil. 10, in c. 3, Mat v. 8. 

aCyprianus lib. de Lapsis versus finem. 


220 


white’s confutation 


fallen virgin, says : “ Then put on a mourning habit, 
and inflict on your members a suitable punishment. 
Let that hair, which once filled you with vanity, be 
now cut off. Let those eyes which impurely beheld 
man, now swim with tears. Let that face which for- 
merly was flushed with guilt, now grow pallid and 
wan. Finally, let your whole body, neglected and 
emaciated, strewed with ashes, and covered with hair 
cloth, tremble through fear : for the pride you took 
in your own beauty was sinful in the sight of God. 
Moreover, let your heart be melted as wax, disquiet- 
ing itself with fastings, and pondering on the methods 
resorted to by the Enemy for its subversion. Let the 
sense too be tortured ; for when it held dominion over 
the members of the body, it yielded to the influence 
of a wicked and sinful power .” 1 

Moreover, the Council of Trent declares that it is 
wholly false and repugnant to the Word of God to 
say, that when the guilt of sin is remitted by the Lord, 
the whole punishment due to it is also forgiven ; 2 and 
it justly punishes with anathema those who obstinately 
persevere in maintaining this false doctrine . 3 For the 
sacred Scripture clearly teaches, that, after the guilt 
of sin is remitted, there still remains a temporal punish- 
ment to be undergone. For example, the sin of dis- 
trust in God’s power was remitted Moses and Aaron, 
yet the temporal punishment was not remitted them ; for 

THEY WERE NOT SUFFERED TO ENTER INTO THE LAND OF 

promise . 4 The same is to be said of the rest of the peo- 
ple of Israel . 5 And Mary, who displeased the Lord by 
siding with Aaron and disputing the superior authority 
of her brother Moses, became covered with leprosy, 
and had to remain in that state an outcast from the 

i Ambros. tom. 1., lib. ad virginem lapsam, c. 8. — Vide Hierony- 

mum tom. 1, in Epitaphio Paul© matris ad Eustochium virginem. 

aConcil. Trident, sess. 14, c. 8. 3 Ibidem, can. 12. 

4 Numbers xx. verses 12, 24, 25, &c. ; and Deuteronomy xxxiv. 4, 
5, &c. 

s Numbers xiv. 20, 21, 22, & c. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


221 


people — for seven days after the guilt of her sin was re- 
mitted her by God. 1 King David also, notwithstanding 
his tears and supplications to God, was deprived of his 
son, as a temporal punishment due to his sin, from 
the guilt of which the Lord had already ob solved him. 11 
“ In this life,” says St. Augustin, “ of which it is writ- 
ten in the Scriptures — ■* Is not the life of man a tempt- 
ation on earth V — in this life in which we daily cry 
unto the Lord, ‘ Deliver us from evil’ — man, though 
sin was the original cause of his misery, is obliged to 
suffer even after his sins are remitted. For the pu- 
nishment is protracted after the crime is forgiven, 
lest the crime should be thought lightly of, were the 
punishment to terminate with it. And even when the 
guilt of sin no longer subjects man to eternal dam- 
nation, a temporal punishment still hangs over him, 
in order to demonstrate the misery due to sin, the 
necessity of amending our inconstant lives, and of 
our exercising a salutary patience.” * 3 4 * 

The same St. Augustin, explaining these words of 
the Psalm — ‘For behold thou hast loved truth: the 
dark and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made 
manifest to me,’ again saith : — “ Thou hast loved 
truth, that is, thou hast not left unpunished the sins 
even of those to whom thou grantest pardon. Thou 
hast loved truth, thou hast gratuitously shown mercy ; 
yet in such a manner as to preserve truth. Thou 
pardonest the man who confesses ; but thou grantest 
him the pardon, when he undertaketh to punish him- 
self. Thus, by this means, are the claims both of 
mercy and of truth reconciled. Of mercy, because 
man is absolved from his sin ; of truth, because sin is 
punished in man. For behold thou hast loved truth, 
the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou 
hast made manifest to me.” 1 


i Numbers xii. 13, 14, &c. 8 Kings xii. 13, 14, 15. 

3 August. tom. 9, exposit in Evangel. Joannis, tract. 124, seu ult. 

4 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. 50. 

19 * 


222 


white’s confutation 


It is in our own power, therefore, to mitigate the 
temporal punishments already inflicted on us by God, 
or wholly to escape those about to be inflicted, if, as 
the Sacred Scripture every where testifies, we endea- 
vour to appease him by fasting, prayer, alms-deeds 
and other pious works . 1 “ For it does not suffice,” 
saith St. Augustin, “ that the sinner alter his conduct 
for the better, and depart from his evil works, unless 
by a penitential sorrow, groans of humility, the sacri- 
fice of a contrite heart, and the co-operation of alms- 
deeds, he make satisfaction to God for his past offen- 
ces .” 2 And in another of his works, he again says : — 
“ Care indeed must be taken lest any one imagine 
that those grievous crimes, which exclude from the 
kingdom of God the persons who commit them, can 
be daily perpetrated, and daily redeemed by alms. 
For life must first be reformed, and God then propi- 
tiated by alms-deeds for our past sins : He cannot be 
bribed to allow us to go on sinning with impunity. 
For although in his mercy he may blot out our past 
sins, provided due satisfaction be made him ; yet he 
hath given to no man the license to sin .” 3 These are 
the words of the great Saint Augustin . 4 And Pope 
Leo the First, in his sermon on fasting, says : — “ By 
prayer God is propitiated; by fasting the concupiscence 
of the flesh is extinguished ; by alms-deeds sins are 
redeemed : and by the union of them all together, the 
image of God is renewed within us — provided we be 
ever ready in his praise, unceasingly solicitous for our 
own purification, and always attentive to the interests 
and support of our neighbour.” j These are the beau- 
tiful words of Leo. 

1 Judges iii. 9 ; 3 Kings xxi. 27, 28, 29 ; 2 Faralipomenon xx. 1, 2, 
&c. ; Isaias xxxviii. 1,2, See. ; Daniel iv. 24; Jonas ii. 1, 2, and 
also last verse ; Luke xiii. 3, 5 ; and 1 Cor. xi. 31, 32. 

2 August, tom. 10, lib. quinquaquinta Homiliarum, homil. 50. seu 
ult. in fine. 

3 Ecclesiasticus xv. 21. 

4 August, tom. 3, Enchirid. ad Laurent c.70, 71, 72, See. 

6 Leo de jejunio decimi mensis, sermo 1. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


223 


And as these works of satisfaction serve to redeem 
us from temporal punishments; so do they in like 
manner (as the fathers of the Council of Trent teach) 
“ cure the evil effects of sin, and extirpate, by the 
exercise of the contrary virtues, the vicious habits 
that have been contracted by a sinful life .” 1 St. Gre- 
gory the Great also explains this double effect of 
satisfaction, in his commentary on the following 
words of Job — ‘ Knowing that thou didst not spare 
the offender,’ 2 — “ Our Lord,” saith Gregory, “ does 
not spare the offender ; for he does not suffer sin to 
pass unpunished. But either penitent man punishes it 
in himself, or God avenges it in him. Sin, therefore, 
is never spared ; for it is never remitted without pun- 
ishment. Thus King David, who, after his confes- 
sion, was greeted by the prophet Nathan with these 
consoling words — ‘ The Lord also hath taken away 
thy sin,’ 3 — had nevertheless, to endure many grievous 
afflictions afterwards , as a satisfaction due to the guilt 
of his offence. In like manner, we are absolved from 
the sin of our first parents in the laver of baptism ; 
but though cleansed and absolved from the guilt of 
that sin, we must still suffer death in the flesh. With 
truth therefore is it said : ‘ Knowing that thou didst 
not spare the offender;’ for even when God looses our 
sins, he himself clears them out from the root, if we 
do not. He takes care to cleanse his elect, by tem- 
poral affliction, from those stains of iniquity, which he 
dislikes to punish in them for an eternity .” 4 

SECTION THE THIRD. 

OF THE SACRAMENT OF EXTREME UNCTION. 

Our merciful Redeemer, Christ, not only instituted 
sacraments, by which, as by salutary remedies, we 
should be assisted at our entrance into, and progress 

1 Concil. Trident, sees. 14, c. 8, de satisfactionis necessitate et 
fructu. 

2 Job ix. 28. 3 2 Kings xii. 13. 

4 Gregor., Exposit. moral, lib. 9, c. 27, in Job c. ix. 


224 


white’s confutation 


through, the Church ; but he also instituted the sacra- 
ment of Extreme Unction , for our departure from life, 
that by its means, as by means of an impenetrable 
shield, we may be defended against the Adversary, 
who at that time in particular strains every nerve and 
employs every artifice to effect our eternal ruin. 
Hence it is sometimes called the sacrament of the 
dying ; sometimes the sacrament of the anointing ot 
the sick; and at other times extreme unction — for, of 
all the sacred unctions the Lord committed to his 
Church, this is the last to be administered. “ This 
sacred unction of the sick was instituted,” says the 
Council of Trent, “ as a true and proper sacrament of 
the New Testament, intimated by Christ our Lord 
in the Gospel of Saint Mark , 1 and afterwards recom- 
mended to the faithful and promulgated by Saint 
James the apostle, the brother of our Lord. ‘Is any 
man,’ says St. James, ‘ sick among you I Let him 
bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray 
over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the 
Lord : And the prayer of faith shall save the sick 
man ; and the Lord shall raise him up : and if he be 
in sins, they shall be forgiven him.’ ” 2 These are the 
words quoted by the Council of Trent ; 3 and in these 
words we have every thing that is essentially requi- 
site for a sacrament. Firstly, we have the external 
rite, viz., the anointing with oil, and also the prayer 
of the priest : by these the matter and form of the 
sacrament are described. Secondly, we have the 
efficacy and virtue of the sacrament in the latter 
words : ‘ And the prayer of faith shall save the sick 
man ; and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be 
in sins they shall he forgiven him.’ 

For the virtue of this sacrament, as the Council of 
Trent well explains it, — “Is the grace of the Holy 


i Mark vi. 13. 2 James v. 14, 15. 

* Concil. Trident sess. 14, c. 1, de institutione Sacramenti Ex- 

trem® Unctionis. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


225 


Ghost, whose anointing blots out offences, if any yet 
remain to be expiated, and cleanses from the effects 
of sin. It also raises up and strengthens the soul of 
the sick man, by exciting within him great confidence 
in the Divine mercy : whereby the sick man is re- 
lieved, and enabled to bear more patiently the incon- 
veniences and pains of his disorder, and to resist more 
effectually the temptations of the devil — the heel of 
the betrayer. Sometimes, also, when it is expedient 
for the salvation of his soul, man’s corporal health is 
restored .” 1 Finally, that Christ was the author of the 
institution, is plainly shown by the following words of 
Scripture — ‘And let them (the priests) pray over him, 
anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord 
that is, by the authority of the Lord, and by virtue 
of the rite instituted by the Lord, as is clear from 
many similar passages of Scripture . 2 For as the 
apostles cannot confer grace of themselves ; therefore 
they cannot annex grace to any particular rites. But 
here the apostle positively and absolutely promises 
grace to those who make a legitimate use of this rite 
— a thing that he never would have done, had it not 
been annexed to it by Christ. 

And repudiating the depraved interpretation of 
innovators, which, through the grace of God, we 
shall expose in the end of this section, we now pro- 
ceed to show that what we have already laid down is 
the true sense and meaning of the apostle’s words, 
and that it is confirmed by the perpetual practice and 
doctrine of the Catholic Church, as will appear be- 
yond all doubt from the following testimonies of the 
fathers and councils. Pope Innocent the First, who, 
as the fathers of the Council of Milevi testify, was an 
ornament to the apostolic chair , 3 after reciting the 


i Concil. Trident, sess. 14, c. 2, de effectu Sacramenti Extrema 
Unctionis. 

a Acts x. 48 ; and Acts xix. 5. 

s Tom. 1, Conciliorum, epist Concil. Milevitan. ad Innocentium 
Papam. 


220 


white’s confutation 


words of the apostle James, subjoins : " This passage 
is, doubtless, to be received and understood as regard- 
ing the faithful in severe corporal sickness , when they 
are to be anointed with the holy oil of chrism. And 
it is lawful that this oil, consecrated by the bishop, 
should be used, not only by priests, but by all Chris- 
tians in anointing themselves or others, in cases of 
necessity.’ , A little after, he more clearly shows 
this unction to be of the number of the sacraments. 
41 This,” says he, “ cannot be administered to peni- 
tents, as it is in its nature a sacrament. For how 
can it be supposed that any one sacrament can be 
given those to whom the rest are denied ?” Finally, 
in the same epistle he exhorts Decentius to preserve 
in his church the Roman custom concerning this 
sacrament, as well as the other things on which he 
consulted him. “ Dearest brother,” saith Innocent, 
44 to every thing which you desired to have explained 
by us, we, of our authority, have taken care to return 
as answer, — that you must carefully preserve and 
guard in your church, the practice of the Church of 
Rome, whence yours derives its origin. m 

And St. Augustin says : 44 As often as sickness 
attacks, let the sick man receive the body and blood 
of Christ, and then anoint his body, in compliance 
with the following commandment of the Scripture : — 
4 Is any man sick 'l Let him bring in the priests of 
the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing 
him with oil in the name of the Lord : And the prayer 
of faith shall save the sick man ; and the Lord shall 
raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be for - 
given him. n See, brethren, how he who in sickness 
has recourse to the Church, deserves to receive health 
of body, and to have his sins forgiven him .” 1 * 3 These 
are the words of Augustin on the sacrament of ex- 


1 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epistola regularis Innocentii primi Papm 

ad Decentium, Eugubinum episcopum, c. 8. 

* James v. 14, 15, &c. 8 August, tom. 10, de tempore, ser. 215. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


227 


treme unction. St. Gregory the First, also, in his 
“ Book of Sacraments,” to which the liturgy of the 
Church of England is deeply indebted , describes not 
only the manner and form of consecrating the oil, but 
also the form and rite of administering the sacrament 
of extreme unction. 1 2 

St. Chrysostom compares this sacrament, as to its 
effect, with baptism, when, commending the dignity 
of the sacerdotal order, he says : “ For they obtain 
the power of forgiving us our sins, not only in bap- 
tism, but afterwards too. ‘ Is any man,’ saith Saint 
James, the apostle, ‘ sick among you ? Let him bring 
in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over 
him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord : 
And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man ; and 
the Lord shall raise him up : and if he be in sins, they 
shall be forgiven him.’ ”* Such are the words of the 
great Saint John Chrysostom. 3 And Origen also, 
who flourished at a much earlier period than the fa- 
thers we have already quoted, ascribes to priests, 
because of this passage of St. James, the power of 
remitting sins. “ There is yet,” saith Origen, “ a 
seventh, but a severe and arduous mode of obtaining 
the remission of sin, viz. by penance ; when the sin- 
ner washes his couch with tears, when his tears make 
his bread day and night, and when he blushes not to 
lay open his sins to the priest of the Lord, and seek 
for medicine,” &c. 4 And after speaking of the sacra- 
ment of penance, Origen adds respecting the sacra- 
ment of extreme unction — “ That whereby is fulfilled, 
what the apostle Saint James commands : ‘ Is any 
man sick 1 Let him call in the priests of the Church, 
and let them impose hands upon him, anointing him 
with oil in the name of the Lord i And the prayer of 
faith shall save the sick man : and if he be in sins, they 
shall be forgiven him”' 

1 Gregor, tom. 5, lib. Sacrament. Edit. Paris. 

2 James v. 14, 15. 8 Chrys. tom 5. lib. 3, de sacerdotio. 

< Origenes tom. 1, homil.2, super Leviticum. 

a James v. 14, 15, &e. 


228 


white’s confutation 


We shall here omit the testimonies of the provincial 
councils, which may be adduced on this subject, as it 
will suffice for our present undertaking, to confirm the 
truth of this sacrament by the authority of the gene- 
ral ones. In the first place then, Marlin the Fifth 
decreed, in the general Council of Constance, that the 
following question should be put to those who were 
suspected of heresy: w Do you believe that the Chris- 
tian who contemptuously omits to receive the sacra- 
ment of confirmation, or that of extreme unction, i 
thereby commits a mortal sin V’ 1 Secondly, in the 
general Council of Florence, Eugene the Fourth, in 
a decree given the Armenians, and which was cheer- 
fully received by the Greeks in Council, enumerates 
extreme unction among the seven sacraments of the 
Church, and confirms and defines, on the testimony 
of the apostle Saint James, its matter, form, efficacy, 
use, and by whom it is to be administered. Moreover, 
the Greek schismatics, and this is a remark worthy 
of attention, though separated and divided from the 
Latin Church for many ages, hold extreme unction 
to be a sacrament of the New Law : for it is a fact 
supported by the authority of Bellarmine, Estius, and 
other celebrated doctors, that when Hieremias, then 
patriarch of Constantinople, was consulted by the 
Lutherans respecting extreme unction, and the other 
sacraments, which Protestants controvert, he most 
positively and distinctly declared that the doctrine 
preserved and taught by the Greeks, was just the 
same as that which the Roman Church preserved and 
taught. “ For,” says Bellarmine, in the place now 
quoted, “ Hieremias states in reply to the Confession 
of the Lutherans, c. 7, that there are seven true and 
proper sacraments, and that there are neither more 
nor less. He also ranks extreme unction among 
them — calls it a Divine sacrament — and says it was 
fully and clearly unfolded by the apostle James.”’ 

l Tom. 2, Conciliorum, Concil. Constantiene. sess. 45, seu ultima. 

* Bellar. tom. 3, lib. de Extrema Unctione, c. 4. — Estius comment, 
in Epist. Jacobi c. 5. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 229 

Finally, after the Council of Trent, in its seventh 
session , 1 enumerates extreme unction among the seven 
sacraments of the New Law, it then, in the fourteenth 
session, gravely explains and learnedly defines the in- 
stitution and efficacy of this sacrament, and also 
teaches by whom it is to be administered, annexing 
at the same time the first canon with the following 
anathema : — “ If any one shall say, that extreme unc- 
tion is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted 
by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by the blessed 
apostle James ; but only a rite received from the fa- 
thers, or a human invention — let him be anathema.” 
And we again read, in the second canon, framed in 
the same session, “ If any man say, that the holy 
anointing of the sick doth not confer grace, or remit 
sins, or raise up the sick ; but that it hath now ceased 
so to do, as if the grace of healing existed only in 
former times — let him be anathema .” 2 

Although the testimonies which we have now ad- 
duced clearly establish, that the words of the apostle 
James are to be understood of extreme unction as a 
sacrament duly instituted ; yet innovators do not cease 
to distort the true sense of these words, and deprav- 
edly apply them to the miraculous gift of healing, 
which they acknowledge to have existed at the time 
of the apostles, but which they allege to have now 
ceased. The absurdity and folly of this interpretation, 
can be proved by many arguments deduced from the 
very context of the scriptural words themselves. 
Firstly, because the use of the anointing in this case, 
is peculiar to such as have been baptized ; ‘ Is any 
man/ saith the apostle, ‘ sick amongst you V Amongst 
you, that is, amongst the faithful, a term which, in the 
language of the Catholic Church, is applied only to 

l Concil. Trident, sess. 7, can. 1, de Sacramentis in genere. 

2Concil. Trident, sess. 14, Doctrinade Sacramento Extrema Unc 
tionis c. 1,2, 3— Et ibidem can. 1,2, &c. de Sacramento Extrema 
Unctionis.— Vide etiam canonem tertium et quartum. 

2-0 


230 


white’s confutation 

such as have received baptism . 1 And there exists no 
doubt, says Pope Innocent the First, that these words 
of Saint James should be received and understood as 
having reference to the faithful in their corporal infir- 
mities . 2 But the gift of healing, as is evident from the 
Acts of the Apostles, was also applied to infidels, and 
people who were not at all baptized . 3 Nay, indeed, this 
miraculous gift, as to its use, rather regarded those who 
were unbelievers . 4 Wherefore, we find that the apostle 
Paul, who healed the father of Publius, when sick of 
fever, and a multitude of people in the island of Malta, 
did not restore Timothy who was in delicate health, 
Epaphroditus who lay dangerously ill, or Trophimus 
whom he left sick at Miletus : 5 knowing the persons 
in whose favour he was, and those for whom he was 
not, to exercise the gift of miracles . 6 

In the next place, the priests of the Church are, ac- 
cording to the command of the apostle James, to be 
brought to the faithful when sick. But the gift of 
healing was a special gift , 7 not given to all priests, or 
to priests exclusively : therefore, according to the 
sense put upon this passage by innovators, the apos- 
tle ought not to have said, let the sick man bring 
in the priests of the Church ; but let him bring in such 
of them as possess the grace of curing disease. Thirdly, 
the gift of healing was confined in its effects to what 
was merely corporal — it extended to the health of the 
body only : whereas the anointing prescribed by St. 
James, conferred on such as were sick an effect prin- 
cipally spiritual, viz. the remission of sins. ‘ And if (saith 
the apostle) he be in sins, they shall he forgiven him. 
Nay indeed, the following words — ‘And the prayer 
of faith shall save the sick man ; and the Lord shall 
raise him up ,’ 8 are, according to the fathers of the 

1 Vide August, tom. 9, lib. de Pastor i bus, c. 1 3. 

2 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Epistola regolaris Innocentii Pap® primi 
ad Decentium Eugubinum Episcopum, c. 8. 

3 Acts xxviii. 8, 9. 4 1 Cor. xiv. 22. 

5 Tim. v. 23 ; Philip, ii. 27 ; and 2 Tim. iv. 20. 

« 1 Cor. xvi. 22. 7 1 Cor. xii. 9, 30. 


8 James v. 15. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


231 


Councils of Florence and Trent, to be understood as 
regarding the health of the mind in the generality of 
cases, and that of the body only occasionally, and when 
it is expedient for the salvation of the soul . 1 For 
whereas (as St. Augustin very properly observes) “the 
great and salutary object of the sacraments, pertains 
more to the hope of future, than to the retention or 
gaining of present benefits ;” 2 therefore it was not 
necessary that bodily health should be absolutely 
promised to the faithful by this or any other sacrament 
of the Church, unless in as much as it conduced 
to the salvation of the soul, and the acquisition of 
heavenly benefits. Fourthly, by the grace of heal- 
ing, the apostles and others, not only healed the 
sick, but also the blind and the lame ; whereas in the 
present case, the infirm and languishing are alone the 
persons whom Saint James desires to be anointed. 
Finally, the principal object of anointing in this case, 
is moral and perpetual in its effects, which is evident 
from what has been already said. Since then the 
object for which it was instituted, constitutes the soul 
of the institution ; it therefore follows, that while the 
soul remains, the institution lives. Add to the fore- 
going, that as all the other institutions mentioned by 
Saint James, in his Epistle, regard the Christians of 
all periods of time ; why should it be believed that 
this institution alone is temporary ? and, as innovators 
would fain have it, scarcely of the duration of a sin- 
gle century? 

The other objection which innovators are also in 
the habit of advancing, namely — that the apostle as- 
cribed the remission of sins to the prayer — therefore 
that he did not attribute it to the anointing — is like- 
wise far from following as a consequence. For the 
apostle ascribed the effect to the prayer and the 
anointing together; to the anointing as to the matter ; 
to the prayer, as to that in which consists the form — 


l Concil. Florent. et Trident, locis supra citatis. 

* August, tom. 3, Enchirid. ad Laurent, c. 66. 


232 


white’s confutation 


‘And let them pray over him, anointing him with oil 
in the name of the Lord . 1 You see that the prayer 
and the anointing are united. The peculiar wording 
of this sentence is also to be observed. The apostle 
does not say : And let them pray for him ; but let 
them pray over him, anointing him with oil. And in 
the very next verse he adds: — ‘And the prayer of 
faith shall save the sick man ; and the Lord shall 
raise him up : and if he be in sins, they shall he for - 
given him .’ Here the apostle James, by synecdoche, 
ascribes the effect of the sacrament to the form, as to 
the superior part. For it is certain, both from the 
doctrine and practice of the Church, that the form of 
this sacrament consists in the prayer. 2 It is also 
called ‘ the prayer of faith/ Firstly, because it pro- 
ceeds from the faith of the Church, which he who 
administers the sacrament represents — which he re- 
lies on for assistance — and from which his power is 
derived. In the next place, it is so called, because, 
as we have already observed, it is instituted for the 
faithful alone. And lastly, because it is by the aid 
of faith only that we are enabled to understand this 
sacrament, and because a great mystery of faith is 
involved therein. 

SECTION THE FOURTH. 

OF THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER. 

Whenever Catholic doctors speak of the Sacrament 
of Order , they mean by the term the exterior and sen- 
sible ordination, by which a man is elevated to the 
ecclesiastical degree; but not the degree itself, which, 
as it is not perceptible to any of our senses, cannot, it 
is evident, be a sacrament. And concerning order 
thus received, the doctors of the Church teach, ac- 


l James v. 14. 

a Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. Decret. Eugenii IV. ad 
Armenos. — Concil. Trident, sess. 14, Doctrina de Sacramento Ex- 
tremre Unctionis, c. 1. — Gregor, tom. 5, lib. Sacramcntorum, Edit. 
Paris. 


OF CHURCH-0 F-ENGLANDISM. 


233 


cording to the Catholic faith, that it is truly and pro- 
perly a sacrament of the New Law. We must how- 
ever observe, that the point of controversy between 
Catholics and innovators is not — whether each one 
of what are commonly called orders be a sacrament; 
but whether taking them collectively and indefinitely, 
there be any one order amongst them to which the 
nature of a sacrament of the New Law properly ap- 
pertains. Catholics unanimously hold and believe in 
the affirmative ; but you, brethren, following the 
course of the innovators, abandon the way of truth, 
and turning aside from it, adopt the negative. 

The Catholic doctrine on this subject, is, supported 
by Scripture, which ascribes to the sacrament of 
order, every thing requisite for a proper sacrament 
of the New Law. For, in the first place, Scripture 
ascribes to it an external and sensible sign — namely, 
the imposition of hands. * Neglect not,’ saith Saint 
Paul, ‘the grace that is in thee, which was given thee 
by prophecy, with the imposition of the hands of the 
priesthood .’ l And in the next place, Scripture annexes 
to this s* r ™ 1 ” ve read in the 



Timothy, the 


second 


following words : — ‘ For which cause I admonish 
thee, that thou stir up the grace of God, which is in 
thee by the imposition of my hands .’ 2 3 Finally, as no 
man can, of his own authority, confer grace, or 
annex it to any particular sign ; hence it is perfectly 
clear from Scripture, that this sign was instituted by 
Christ for the purpose of conferring grace : for Scrip- 
ture teaches us that the apostles not only used this 
rite in ordination, but that they also transmitted it 
to their successors. This is proved from the fifth 
chapter of the first Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, 
where we read : ‘ Impose not hands lightly upon any 
man.’' The same is also proved by the constant and 

1 1 Timothy iv. 14. 

2 2 Timothy i. 6. — Sec also Acts vi. 6, and Acts xiv. 22. 

3 1 Timothy v. 22. 


20 * 


234 


white’s confutation 


invariable practice of the Church, which is the best 
interpreter of Scripture. 

In confirmation of the truth of this sacrament, we 
shall produce the testimonies of two or three of the 
ancient fathers, who were renowned for their piety 
and learning. St. Gregory the First, who furnishes a 
rich and important testimony on the sacrament of 
order, saith: “Who are they who now sell doves in 
the temple of God, but they who in the Church 
receive a price for the imposition of hands ? through 
which imposition, indeed, the Holy Ghost is given 
them from heaven. The dove therefore is sold, 
because the imposition of hands, through which the 
Holy Ghost is received, is granted upon a price paid 
down .” 1 And St. Leo the Great, in his epistle to Dios- 
corus of Alexandria, teaches that, according to the 
apostolic doctrine, both they who confer and they 
who receive holy orders, should be fasting at the 
time — “In order,” saith he, “that we may under- 
stand what should be the devotion of those who con- 
fer, and of those who receive them ; and also the ex- 
treme caution with which we should guard against so 
blessed a sacrament appearing to be accomplished in 
a negligent manner .” 2 

But St. Augustin writes with the greatest clearness 
of all the ancients, respecting this sacrament. In 
.the first passage which we shall quote from him, he 
says: “But suppose clergymen be ordained for the 
purpose of collecting congregations of the people, 
though the congregations of the people do not follow, 
yet the sacrament of ordination remains in those 
who have been ordained. And even if a clergyman 
be suspended for any offence, he doth not, though 
awaiting judgment, lose this sacrament of the Lord 


1 Gregor, lib. 40, Homiliarum de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, 
homil. 17. 

a Leo epist. 81, ad Dioscorum Alexandrinum Episcopum c. 1. — 
Vide etiam epist. 87, ad Episcop. Aphrican. &c., c. 1. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


235 


once given him by the imposition of hands .” 1 The 
same St. Augustin, writing against Parmenianus, the 
Donatist, says: “For this assertion, which some of 
those who have been convicted by the truth began to 
make, namely — he who deserts the Church does not 
indeed forfeit baptism, but forfeits the right of ad- 
ministering it — appears to be false and unmeaning on 
many accounts. In the first place, because no rea- 
son is shown why he who cannot lose baptism, can 
lose the right of administering it. For both (baptism 
and order) are sacraments , and both are given to 
man by a certain consecration ; the one when he is 
baptized, the other when he is ordained : and there- 
fore in the Catholic Church, neither of them can ever 
be repeated. Thus when the Donatist prelates, re- 
nouncing their schism, come over to us for the sake 
of peace- — should it seem expedient to continue them 
in the exercise of the same functions as they before 
discharged — we do not re-ordain them : for as their 
baptism, so also their ordination, remains entire. The 
evil consisted in their schism, which is corrected by 
the peace of unity ; not in the sacraments , which, on 
whomsoever they be bestowed, are always unchange- 
able. And though the church may deem it expedient 
that such prelates should not discharge their offices ; 
they nevertheless retain their ordination. Wherefore, 
lest the sacrament , and not the man, should appear 
to have suffered injury, hands are not again imposed 
upon them before the people. And even should this 
happen to be done through ignorance, provided it be 
not defended with obstinacy, but immediately cor- 
rected when discovered, it is easy to obtain pardon 
for it — ‘ For our God is not a God of dissension but 
of peace.’ 2 Neither are the sacraments of his Church 
displeasing to him, even in those who have withdrawn 
from the Church: but they who have withdrawn, are 


1 August, tom. 6, lib. de bono conjugali contra Jovinianum, c. 24. 

a 1 Cor. iv. 33. 


230 


white’s confutation 


themselves his enemies.” And a little further on he 
adds: “ If we be wrong, let them (the Donatists) ex- 
plain, how the baptismal sacrament cannot, and how 
the sacrament of ordination can be lost : for they 
assert that whosoever deserts the Church, does not 
forfeit the sacrament of baptism, yet does forfeit that 
which gives him the right of administering baptism. 
For if both be sacraments, ichich no person doubts , 
why is not the former lost, and w r hy is the latter? 
Injury can be done to neither sacrament .” 1 

Again, St. Augustin says : “ The sacrament of 
baptism is that conferred on the person baptized ; the 
sacrament of ordination, is that which gives the right 
of baptizing. And as he who, after baptism, forsakes 
the unity of the Church, does not thereby lose the 
sacrament of baptism ; 60 in like manner, whoever 
forsakes the Church after ordination, loses not the 
sacrament whereby baptism is administered : for no 
sacrament can suffer injury. If he depart from the 
society of the wicked, the sacrament too departs ; if 
he remain among the wicked, that too remains. Since 
it is then admitted, that he who has departed from 
unity, could not lose his baptism ; it therefore follows 
— as his departure from unity destroyed not his right 
of administering it — that the validity of the baptism 
given by him must likewise be admitted. For as they 
who received baptism before their separation, are not 
rebaptized on their return ; so they who were ordained 
before their separation, are not re-ordained on their 
return. So far from this being the case, they are 
allowed to discharge the same offices in the ministry 
as they before discharged, provided it be for the good 
of the Church; and though they should not act in the 
capacity of ministers, they yet retain the sacrament 
of their ordination, and therefore hands are not again 
imposed upon them before the laymen. For when 
Felicianus deserted us together w r ith Maximinianus, 


1 August, tom. 7, contra epistolam Parmeniani, lib. 2, c. 13. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENCLANDISM. 287 

he lost neither the sacrament of baptism nor that of 
order; but now we have both himself and those whom, 
during his separation, he baptized in the Maximinian 
schism .” 1 These are the words of Augustin. 

The testimonies already adduced clearly demon- 
strate what the Catholic doctrine on the sacrament of 
order was in the early ages of the Church ; but as 
two general councils, namely, those of Florence and 
Trent, have defined holy order to be truly and pro- 
perly a sacrament of \he New Law, instituted by 
Christ , 2 there is no room for doubt left to those who 
love truth, and whose desire it is to promote the peace 
of the Church. Moreover, in the ordination of a 
priest, the order bestowed on whom is the first and 
principal one of all the others, and that in which all 
the rest are consummated, there is confeired, as the 
Council of Trent teaches, a twofold spiritual power . 3 
The one is the power of consecrating, offering, and 
administering the body and blood of Christ ; the other 
the power of remitting and retaining sins. The first 
was given by Christ to the apostles and their succes- 
sors in the priesthood, by these words of the Gospel? 
* Do ye this for a commemoration of me .’ 4 Whence 
St. Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Tryphon, speak- 
ing of this power, says : “ God accepts sacrifice from 
none, except his own priests. Wherefore, by showing 
preference in favour of the only sacrifice to be offered 
in his name, that is, the eucharist of bread and the 
chalice, instituted by Jesus Christ, and now celebrated 
by Christians all over the earth, God testifies that this 
sacrifice is well pleasing and acceptable to him. But 
the sacrifices offered by you and your priests, he dis- 
dainfully rejects in these words : * I will not accept 


1 August, tom. 7, de baptismo contra Donatist. lib. I. c. 1. 

2 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. in decret. Eugenii iv. ad 
Armen. — Concil. Trident, sess. 7, can. 1, de Sacramentis in genere; 
et sess. 23, de Sacramento ordinis c. 1,3; et ibidem can. 3, 4, &c. 

8 Concil. Trident, sess, 23, de Sacramento Ordinis, c. 1. 

4 Luke xxii. 19. See also 1 Cor. xi. 23, 24, &c. 


238 


white’s confutation 


sacrifices from your hands: because from the rising 
of the sun even to the going down, my name is glo- 
rified among the Gentiles: but ye profane it .’” 1 Such 
are the words of Justin Martyr . 2 * The author of the 
commentary ascribed to St. Ambrose also speaks of 
this power, when he says that by ordination the priest 
is authorized — “ to offer sacrifice to God in the place 
of the Lord, his own conscience being his witness.”* 
But we shall say more on this subject when we come 
to examine the thirty-first article. 

The other power given to priests in ordination, is 
that of remitting and retaining sins . 4 “ Temporal 
princes,” says St. Jerom, “ possess, it is true, the power 
of enchaining ; but this power is limited to the body — 
whereas the sacerdotal chain, of which I speak, reach- 
eth the soul, and extendeth even to heaven. So that 
what the priests pronounce here below, God ratifies 
above — the Master confirms the sentence of his ser- 
vants. For what can you say this is, but a complete 
power over the concerns of heaven granted them by 
God ? 4 Whose sins you shall retain , 5 * saith our Lord, 

4 they are retained . 55 What power, I ask, can be 
greater than this V 56 

Also St. Gregory the First, considering these 
words of the Gospel — 4 Whose sins you shall forgive, 
they are forgiven them : and whose sins you shall re- 
tain, they are retained ,’ 7 says : 44 It is delightful to 
behold to what a pitch of glory the disciples, called 
to duties so humble, have been exalted. For not only 
are they secured as to their own salvation, but they 
also receive power to loose the bonds of others. The 


1 Malachias i. 10, 11. 

2 Bibliothec. Pat. tom. 2, Justinus Martyr, dialog, cum Trypho 
Judffio. 

8 Inter opera Ambrosii, tom. 5, comment, in 1 Tim. c. 4. v. 14. 

4 John xx. 22, 23. « John xx. 22. 

6 Chrysost. tom. 5, de saccrdotio lib. 3. — Vide etiam Theophyl. 

enarrat. in Evangel. Joannis c. 20. v. 22, 23. 

7 John xx. 23. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 


239 


sovereignty of the heavenly judgment is allotted them ; 
so that, acting in the place of God, they can retain 
the sins of some, and loose those of others .” 1 With 
respect to this power, see subsection the second, on 
Confession. 

Moreover, the power conferred by the sacrament 
of order is also accompanied with grace , which sanc- 
tifieth the person ordained, so as to enable him to 
make a good exercise of this power, and to discharge 
the duties of his office in a laudable manner. Where- 
fore St. Cyril of Alexandria., considering the words of 
the Gospel of St. John , 2 as quoted above, says : “ As 
soon as Jesus Christ had honoured them with the great 
dignity of the apostleship, and constituted them the 
disposers and priests of his Divine altars, he imme- 
diately sanctifies them, by breathing out the Spirit 
abundantly upon them, in order that we should firmly 
believe, that the Spirit is not different from the Son, 
but consubstantial with him, and through him pro- 
ceeding from the Father. He also shows how it 
necessarily follows as a consequence, that the Spirit 
is given to those who are chosen by him for the Divine 
apostleship. And why is the Spirit given them ? 
Because they can do nothing pleasing to God, neither 
can they emancipate themselves from the trammels of 
sin, unless they be first endowed with virtue from on 
high, and transformed into something other than what 
they were. And for this reason was it said to a cer- 
tain man of the ancients : ‘ The Spirit of the Lord 
shall come upon thee, and thou shalt he changed into 
another man .’ 3 — Saint Paul also, who possessed the 
most consummate wisdom, when relating that he 
laboured in the apostleship, immediately subjoined : — 
4 Yet not I, hut the grace of God with me. 9 ” 4 Then, 
affi'r narrating the consecration of Aaron and his 
sons , 5 Cyril adds : “ For as w r ater and blood are the 


1 Gregor, lib. 40, Homiliarum de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, 
Homil. 26. 3 John xx. 22, 23. 

8 1 Kings x. 6. <1 Cor. xv. 10. * Exodus xxix. 


240 


white’s confutation 


things by which sanctification was produced ; how, 
or by whom, can it be doubted that the beauty of 
truth should be moulded in types still more obscure ? 
Our Lord Jesus — the figure of the law being trans- 
lated into the force of truth — perfected for himself the 
priests of his divine altars : for Jesus is the acme of 
perfection. He perfected them indeed by means of 
true sanctification, rendering them partakers of his 
own nature by communicating to them the Spirit, and 
remoulding, as it were, the nature of man unto super- 
natural force and glory .” 1 

The Council of Florence defines the effect of this 
sacrament to be an increase of grace, in order that 
those upon whom it is conferred may live in a man- 
ner becoming their ministry . 2 And the Council of 
Trent, which was assembled at a later period, hath 
defined that sanctifying grace is conferred by means 
of holy orders. Here are the words of the council : — 
“ Whereas it is evident from the testimony of Scrip- 
ture, from apostolical tradition, and the unanimous 
consent of the fathers, that grace is conferred by 
means of sacred ordination, which is performed by 
words and external signs ; no one should doubt, that 
order is truly and properly one of the seven sacra- 
ments of the holy Church. For the apostle saith, * I 
admonish thee, that thou stir up the grace of God, 
which is in thee BY THE IMPOSITION OF MY 
HANDS. For God hath not given us the spirit of 
fear : but of power, and of love, and of sobriety/ ” 3 
These are the words pronounced by the Council of 
Trent . 4 How beautifully does Saint Paul here de- 
scribe by the fruits of sanctification, the Holy Spirit 
given by Christ to his apostles and their successors in 
the priesthood, by means of sacred ordination ! 5 The 

1 Cyril. Alexan. tom. 4. comment, in Joan. lib. 12. 

2 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. in Decreto Eugenii Pap© 
ad Armcnos. 

3 2 Timothy i. 6, 7. 

4 Concil. Trident, sess. 23, de Sacramento Ordinis, c. 3. 

» John xx. 22, 23. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


241 


Holy Spirit banishes from them servile and worldly 
fear ; confers on them virtue and fortitude in the dis- 
charge of their offices; inspires them with charity 
towards God and the flocks subject to their charge ; 
and bestows on them a spirit of sobriety, moderating 
all inordinate desires and passions . 1 2 

“ But,” to use the words of the Council of Trent, 
“ as the sacerdotal ministry is a divine work, it was 
meet, for the exercising of it with greater dignity and 
veneration, that there should be in the methodical 
arrangement of the Church several and different 
orders of ministers, whose office it should be to wait 
upon the priests ;” 8 and that by these orders, as by so 
many steps, they should rise to the priesthood, as we 
see is the case even at the present day. For the de- 
crees of pontiffs, the canons of councils, the works of 
the ecclesiastical historians, and the writings of the' 
fathers, manifestly show that not only has the deacon- 
ship, mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, been in use in 
the Church since the days of the apostles ; but also 
the names and ministries of the other inferior orders, 
namely, those of subdeacon, acolyte, exorcist, lector, 
and janitor. We shall however quote a few passages 
from the fathers and councils, in order to show more 
clearly that this usage has always subsisted in the 
Church. 

First, the canons, commonly called the “ Canons of 
the Apostles,” make mention of this variety of orders. 
The second canon runs thus — “ Let the priest be or- 
dained by one bishop, so also the deacon, and the 
rest of the clergy .” 3 St. Ignatius, who died a martyr, 
and who was the disciple of the apostles , in his epistle 
to the people of Antioch, expressly salutes the sub- 
deacons, lectors, exorcists, and janitors . 4 St. Cyprian 


1 2 Timothy i. 6, 7. 

2 Concil. Trident, scss. 23, De Sacramento Ordinis, c. 3. 

3 Tom. 1 , Conciliorum, Canon. Apostol., can. 2. — Vide etiam can. 
9, 17, <fee. 

4 Bibliothee. Patrum tom. 1, Ig-natii epist. ad Antiochenos. 

21 


242 


Nvmniri COx\F UTATION 


makes mention of Mettius, a subdeacon, and of Nice- 
phorus, an acolyte . 1 And St. Cornelius, pope and 
martyr, in his epistle to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, 
enumerates all the orders in these words : “ He” (No- 
vatian) “ was not ignorant — for how could he ? that 
in it (namely, the Roman Church) there were six and 
forty priests, seven deacons, seven subdeacons, and 
forty-two acolytes, exorcists, and lectors, together 
with fifty-two janitors .” 2 3 

Pope Damasus relates, in his Pontifical Book, that 
Caius, pope and martyr, decreed, that all the orders 
should be gone through before any man could rise to 
the episcopacy. “ He decreed,” says St. Damasus, 
“ that whoever was worthy to be constituted bishop 
should go through all the orders in the Church in the 
following manner : — That he should first be janitor, 
lector, exorcist, acolyte ; that he should next be or- 
dained subdeacon, deacon, priest — and then conse- 
crated bishop .” 4 The fourth Council of Carthage, at 
which St. Augustin was present, enumerates all and 
every one of the orders and their rites, and also ex- 
plains that they are conferred by means of ordina- 
tion . 5 * The Council of Florence likewise enumerates 
them . 8 And finally, the Council of Trent not only 
enumerates all the orders ; but also enacts thus in its 
second canon : — “ If any one say that, besides the 
priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church, 
other orders, both major and minor, by which as by 
certain steps, the priesthood is to be reached — let him 
be anathema .” 7 


1 Cyprian, cpist. 42, ad Cornelium Papam. 

2 Euseb. Caesar, hist, ecclesiast. lib. 6, c. 35, epist. Cornelii Papae 
ad Fabium Antiochcn. 

3 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Decreta Caii Papas ex libro pontificali Da- 
masi Papoe. — Vide etiam cx eodem libro pontificali dccreta Sylvcstri 
primi Papae, ubi omnes septem. ordines enumcrantur. 

4 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Concil. Carthaginens. 4, can. 2, 3, 4, &c. 

5 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florentin., in Becreto Eugenii IV. 

ad Armenos. 

8 Concil. Trident, sess. 23, de Sacramento ordinis, c. 2, ibidem, 

can. 2. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENCLANDISM. 


243 


SECTION THE FIFTH. 

OF THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE. 

“ The father of the human race,” to use the words 
of the Council of Trent , 1 “ guided by the instinct of 
the Divine Spirit, pronounced the matrimonial bond 
to be perpetual and indissoluble, when he said : ‘ This 
is bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh — For this 
cause shall a man leave father and mother, and cleave 
unto his wife : and they shall be two in one flesh ;’ 2 
yet, strictly speaking, marriage was not, either in the 
state of innocence, or in that of corrupt nature, before 
Christy a sacrament conferring grace. For in the 
state of innocence, there was no need of sacramental 
grace, since there was no concupiscence, or sin, and 
consequently no need of a remedy to counteract them. 
And the blessings given to our first parents, when 
God said to them : ‘ Increase and multiply, and fill 
the earth / 3 conferred no spiritual grace ; but, as St. 
Augustin teaches , 4 corporal fecundity only, which, as 
it was common to them with all animals , 5 remained 
with them even after they had become offenders. 
Moreover, we do not read in Scripture, neither does 
tradition inform us, that, in the state of corrupt nature 
before Christ, marriage was established as a sacra- 
ment properly so called : Nay, indeed, under the Old 
Testament, polygamy and divorce, which are utterly 
repugnant to this sacrament, were tolerated by Divine 
permission. Wherefore, St. Augustin teaches, that 
marriage is a sacrament only in the Church : 6 because 
in the Church alone is it held to be indissoluble, when 


1 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 2 1, doctrina de Sacramento Matrimonii. 

* Genesis ii. 23, 24. See Matthew xix. 4, 5, 6, and Ephesians v. 
31,32. 

3 Genesis i. 28. 

4 August, tom. 1, lib. 13, Confessionum, c. 24. — Idemetiam tom. 5. 
‘ De Civitate Dei,’ lib. 14, c. 21, 22. 

s Genesis i. 22. 

c August, tom. 6, lib. de bono conjugali contra Jovinianum, c. 7, 15, 
18, 24. 


244 


white’s confutation 


once consummated'. Add the following consideration, 
that under the Old Law, grace was not at all so ne- 
cessary, as it is under the New, to enable people to 
bear with the annoyances occurring in the matrimo- 
nial state ; for then, by means of polygamy, divorce, 
<fcc., many conjugal difficulties were obviated, which 
now render grace the more necessary. 

Under the New Testament, Christ our Lord (poly- 
gamy and divorce being done away with) reduced 
matrimony to its original institution , 1 and raised the 
marriage of the faithful into a sacrament. “For,” 
as the Council of Trent teaches, “ Christ himself, the 
author and perfecter of all the venerable sacraments, 
by his passion merited for us that grace, which should 
perfect natural love — strengthen the indissoluble union 
— and sanctify the married. This the apostle Paul 
intimates, when he says — ‘ Husbands, love your wives, 
as Christ also loved the Church, and delivered himself 
up for it’ — presently adding ; ‘ This is a great sacra- 
ment : but I speak in Christ, and in the Church* 2 — 
Wherefore (continue the fathers of the council), as 
matrimony, under the evangelical law, doth, through 
Christ, excel in grace the primitive marriages ; with 
good reason therefore have our holy fathers, councils, 
and the universal tradition of the Church always 
taught, that it is to be reckoned among the sacra- 
ments of the New Law .” 3 These are the words pro- 
nounced by the fathers of this universal council. 

The Council of Florence also teaches that the object 
of this sacrament, mentioned by the apostle Paul in 
the passage now quoted from his epistle to the Ephe- 
sians, is to be found in its signification of the indivi- 
sible union of Christ and his Church . 4 But as this 
indivisible union of Christ and his Church is twofold 


' Matthew xix. 4, 5, 6, &c. * Ephesians v. 25, 32. 

3 Concil. Trident, sess. 24, doctrina de Sacramento matrimonii. — 
Vide Cyril. Alexand. tom. 4, lib. 2, comment, in c. 2, Joannis. 

4 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florent in decreto Eugenii IV., ad 
Armen os. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 245 

— the one by the conformity of his nature with ours 
the other by the spiritual love which he bears his 
Church : 2 if the marriage of the faithful did not in 
addition to the power of the body which it mutually 
gives those who enter into that state, also confer spi- 
ritual love for the purpose of indissolubly uniting their 
minds, it would not perfectly represent the union sub- 
sisting between Christ and his Church through spirit- 
ual love. Furthermore, since it is a most difficult 
thing to be so bound to a woman, as that for no cause, 
and by means of no dispensation, can the union be 
dissolved when once consummated, or a second wife 
taken during the lifetime of the first — who can be- 
lieve that God instituted a state so difficult, without 
at the same time conferring on us the assistance of 
his grace for the purpose of overcoming the difficulty? 
Add to this, that the New Law, which the Scripture 
calls — ‘ A sweet yoke, and a light burden ,’ 3 would, 
when compared with the Old, far exceed it for seve- 
rity, in this respect, were not the marriage of the 
faithful accompanied by grace: for the Hebrews were 
allowed a number of wives together, and were also 
allowed to dismiss them with impunity by a bill of 
divorce. 

But independently of any other reasons, the autho- 
rity of two general councils, whose province it is to 
define matters of faith, should suffice for determining 
the present question. The general Councils both of 
Florence and Trent, define matrimony to be a true 
and proper sacrament of the New Law — and punish 
with anathema those who deny it . 4 Yet since inno- 
vators are in the habit of boasting in their writings 
and public harangues, that the ancient fathers and 
doctors have never mentioned the sacrament of mar- 


l John i. 14. 2 Ephesians v. 25, 26, 27, &c. 

3 Mat. xi. 30 ; and 1 John v. 3. 

4 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florent. in decret. Eugenii IV. ad 
Armenos. — Et Concil. Trident, sess. 24, doctrina de Sacramento ma- 
trimonii. — Et ibidem, can. 1. 

21 * 


24G white’s confutation 

riage, or given to marriage the appellation of a sacra- 
ment, it will be worth while, in order to show the 
falsehood of their vain boastings, to produce some tes- 
timonies from the writings of the fathers and doctors 
of the ancient Church, in which they explicitly teach, 
or at least imply, the doctrine laid down by the Church 
at the present day respecting this sacrament. 

St. Chrysostom in his fifty-sixth homily on Genesis, 
speaking of the marriage of Jacob with Lia, the 
daughter of Laban, and comparing it with the Chris- 
tian marriages, says : “ Is it not absurd, that we who 
have received so great grace and mercy, and are 
partakers of the tremendous and unspeakable sacra- 
ments, should in this respect be inferior to Laban, 
who was as yet addicted to the worship of idols? 
Or do you not hear the apostle Paul, telling you, 
THAT MARRIAGE IS A SACRAMENT, and that 
it is the image of that love, which Christ declares 
towards his church? 1 ” These are the clear and for- 
cible words of Chrysostom. Pope Innocent the First, 
in his ninth epistle to Probus declares that — marriage 
is founded on Divine grace ; 2 and what, we ask, does 
this mean, but that marriage is confirmed by means 
of the grace conferred therein, and consequently 
that it is a sacrament ? And before him, St. Ambrose 
said: “Ye who aspire after the grace of baptism, as 
candidates for the faith, learn also the sober discipline 
of continence.” Then, after exhorting at some length 
on the observance of continence, and conjugal fidelity, 
this holy and renowned father thus concludes: “We 
know that God is the high priest and guardian of 
marriage, who sufiereth not another’s bed to be de- 
filed. Whoever does so, forfeits the grace of God, 
by sinning against him, and violating his law : and 
because he sins against God, he forfeits all participa- 
tion in this HEAVENLY SACRAMENT .” 3 The 

1 Chrysost. tom. 1, homil. 56 in Genesim. 

2 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, cpistok, 9, Innocentii Pap® ad Probum. 

3 Ambros. tom. 4, de Abraham Patriarcha, lib. 1 . c. 7. 


OF CHUItCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


247 


author of the commentary which is attributed to St. 
Ambrose, considering these words of the apostle 
Paul : * This is a great sacrament ; but I speak in 
Christ and in the Church/ 1 2 also says: ‘‘St. Paul de- 
clares that there is a great mysterious sacrament in 
the union of man and woman. Yet he doth not ex- 
plain this mystery ; but instances another case — not 
dissimilar to the former — which he knows will tend 
to the good of mankind, namely, the case of Christ 
and his Church. — So that as a man, leaving father 
and mother, cleaves to his wife, the Church, in like 
manner, renouncing all error, adheres, and is subject, 
to its head, which is Christ.” 8 And Lactantius, who 
flourished prior to all these whose testimonies we 
have now quoted, and who, though not a doctor of 
the Church, was however an ancient writer, says in 
the sixth chapter of his “ Epitome of the Divine Insti- 
tutions “ Let him who hath a wife seek none 
other : but content with her alone, chastise the flesh, 
and guard the sacrament of inviolable marriage.” 3 * * 

But the testimony of St. Augustin respecting this 
sacrament, is the clearest of all. He thus writes : 
“ Our holy men had not recourse, for the sake of a 
more numerous offspring, to what the Roman Cato is 
said to have done, namely — that during his own life- 
time, he gave up his wife to fill with children the 
house even of another. For in the marriage of our 
women, a higher consideration is set on the sanctity 
of the sacrament, than on the offspring of the mar- 
riage.” And again, chapter the 24th, he says : “ In 
all nations and amongst all mankind indiscriminately, 
the good of marriage consists in propagating the hu- 
man race, and promoting chastity; but among the 


1 Ephesians v. 32. 

2 Inter opera Ambrosii tom. 5, commentar. in Epist. ad Ephes. 

c. 5, in fine. 

a Bibliothec. Patrum tom. 3. Lactant. in Epitome divinarum in- 

stitute c. 6. 


248 


white’s confutation 


people of God, there is an additional consideration, 
the holiness of the sacrament, which renders it un- 
lawful, even in case of divorce, for either party to 
marry during the lifetime of the other.” 1 Again, 
writing on the marriage of the faithful, this most 
learned father says: “ For it is not, indeed, fecundity 
alone, the fruit whereof is children — or chastity alone, 
the bond whereof is faith ; but besides these a certain 
nuptial sacrament is carefully set apart for the faith- 
ful who enter into the marriage state. Wherefore 
St. Paul says : 4 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ 
also loved the Church.’ 2 The object of this sacra- 
ment certainly is, that man and woman united by the 
bond of marriage, should pass their lives inseparably 
together ; and that it should not be lawful to put them 
asunder, unless in case of fornication. This indisso- 
luble union is ^indeed faithfully preserved between 
Christ and his Church; so that He living with his 
living Church to eternity, can never be divorced from 
her. In the city of our God, in his holy mount, that 
is, in the Church of Christ, and amongst the married 
of the faithful, who, doubtless, are members of Christ, 
so great is the veneration entertained for this sacra- 
ment, that, although either men or women should 
marry for the purpose of rearing families, it is not 
lawful for them to separate, even in case of barren- 
ness, that they may marry others who are fruitful. 
And if any man do so, he becomes guilty, not by the 
law of this world, which, in cases of divorce, allows 
new marriages to be formed — a liberty which our 
Lord testifies that Moses granted the Israelites, be- 
cause of the hardness of their hearts ; 3 but by the Law 
of the Gospel, he becomes guilty of adultery : and the 
woman in like manner, if she marry another man. 
And moreover, those who have been once married, 


1 August, tom. 6, lib. de bono conjugali contra Jovinianum, c. 18 ; 
et ibidem, c. 24. 

8 Ephesians v. 25. 3 Mat. xix. 8. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


249 


though now separated, still continue during their en- 
tire lives, the husband and wife of each other, more 
so than of those with whom they have subsequently 
united themselves. For they would not be guilty of 
adultery with the others, unless they remained man 
and wife to each other.” 1 These are the words of 
Augustin. And in order we should know that Au- 
gustin is speaking of a sacrament properly so called, 
he compares the marriage of the faithful with baptism 
and ordination , as with sacraments of a like kind : 
this can be seen on reference to the two portions of 
his works last quoted from. 

The invariable practice of the ancient Church also, 
in having marriage celebrated by the ministry of 
priests, was no obscure proof that it held marriage to 
De a sacrament. St. Chrysostom, in his 48th Homily 
on Genesis, speaking of the marriage of the faithful, 
says : “ All those things must be banished from Chris- 
tian marriages, and the bride taught modesty from the 
beginning ; the priests must be called in, and the con- 
jugal knot bound with prayers and benedictions — in 
order that the love and continence of the bride may 
be increased — that the object and end of every thing 
done be to introduce works of virtue into that house, 
and banish therefrom the snares of the devil — and 
that they, who are united by the grace of God, may 
spend their lives in happiness and peace.” 2 

The fourth Council of Carthage, at which St. Au- 
gustin was present, thus decrees respecting the mar- 
riage of the faithful : “ Let the bridegroom and bride, 
when about to receive the benediction of the priest, 
be presented by their parents or bride folk. And when 
they shall have received the benediction, let them, 
through respect for this blessing, pass the same night 
separate.’* 3 

1 August, tom. 7, lib. 1, de nuptiis et concupiscentia ad Valerium 
Comitem, c. 10. 

2 Chryscret. tom. 1, homil. 48, in Genesim, in fine. 

3 Tom. 1 , Conciliorum, Concil. Carthaginense 4, can. 13. 


250 


white’s confutation 


St. Ambrose, in his Epistle to Yigilius on the mar- 
riage of the faithful, thus writes : “ As the marriage 
must be rendered holy by the sacerdotal veil and 
blessing ; how can that be called a marriage where 
there is not agreement of faith V n And Tertullian, 
who flourished before St. Ambrose, describes the hap- 
piness of his marriage thus, “ A marriage which the 
Church approves, the oblation confirms, and the angels 
proclaim when sealed,” &c. * 2 See also the first epistle 
of Evaristus, pope and martyr, to all the African 
bishops. 3 

Finally, it is no inconsiderable argument in favour 
of the Catholic doctrine respecting this sacrament, 
that all the Greeks, they who have become schismatics 
as well as they who continue Catholics, believe mar- 
riage to be a proper sacrament of the New Law. 
For (as Catholic doctors observe 4 ) Hieremias, patri- 
arch of Constantinople, published, in the year 1576, 
in his dwn name and that of the other Grecian pre- 
lates, their censure on the Augsburg Confession — and 
in the seventh chapter of this their censure it is stated, 
that marriage is a DIVINE SACRAMENT, and is 
one of the seven sacraments delivered to the Church 
by Christ and his apostles.* 


J Ambros. tom. 3, epistola 70, ad Vigilium. 

2 Tertul. lib. 2, ad uxorem, in fine. 

3 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Epistola prima Evaristi Papoe ad omnes 
Episcopos Aphricanos, 

4 Bellar. tom. 3, de controversiis, lib. de matrimonii Sacramento, 
c. 4. — Estius in lib. 4* Sentent. distinct. 26, paragraphum 7. 

* In the note affixed to page 190 of this work we have extracted, 
from the Book of Common Prayer, the Protestant definition of a 
sacrament, which is contained in these words — tl An outward and 
visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained 
by Christ and we now put it to the candour of all impartial and 
enlightened Church-of-England men to say, if the sacraments which 
they reject, have not all the essentials which this their own definition 
requires ? That the sacraments of confirmation, penance, orders, 
matrimony, and extreme unction, have, each of them, the essentials 
required by the Protestant definition, equally as the sacraments of 
baptism and the eucbarist, must be evident to every one who reads 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


251 


CHAPTER XXVII. 

The Twenty -Eighth Article Examined. 

In this article, entitled— “ Of the Lord’s Supper,” 
amongst other things, are contained the following — 
“ Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance 


the preceding chapters with due attention, and a sincere desire of 
learning the truth. For the reader will find that they have been 
taught in the Church of Christ from the days of the apostles to the 
present, and that they are inculcated in the writings of the earliest 
and most renowned of the fathers, including Ignatius, the disciple 
of the apostles, who died a martyr for the faith, having been sen- 
tenced by the cruel Emperor Trajan to be devoured by wild beasts — 
which death he suffered in the amphitheatre at Rome, on the 21st 
November, 116. It will, we repeat, be found on due examination, 
that each of the five sacraments, so inconsistently rejected byChurch- 
of-England men, has the three essentials required by the Protestant 
definition contained in the Book of Common Prayer. For instance, 
we shall now see if extreme unction have, or have not, attached to 
it these three essentials — namely, a “ visible sign” — •“ inward grace” 
— and if it be “ ordained by Christ.” We at once proceed to Scrip- 
ture — ‘ Is any man,’ saith the apostle James, ‘ sick among you ? 
Let him bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over 
him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer 
of faith shall save the sick man ; and the Lord shall raise him up ; 
and if he be in sins they shall be forgiven him.* Here we have, 
firstly, the “visible sign,” in the anointing ici th oil; secondly, we 
have the proof of “spiritual grace,” in the forgiveness of sins; and 
thirdly, the rite must have been “ ordained by Christ for, were it 
not, the apostle James would never have dared to say, that on the 
foregoing ceremonies being performed over a man, the LonD shall 
raise him up. What is now proved respecting the sacrament of ex- 
treme unction, can with equal facility be proved regarding the others, 
by adopting the simple method here followed, and trying each ac- 
cording to the above test. Our reason for selecting this sacrament 
in particular, is, because those who are not Catholics more commonly 
direct their raillery against it, than they do against the others. But 
we now put it to the candour of our Protestant readers to say, how 
they can consistent^ reconcile it to themselves to deny to extreme 
unction the dignity of a sacrament when they see that it has attach- 
ed to it all and every one of the essentials which they themselves 
define as necessary in their own catechism, and in their Book of 
Common Prayer ? It surely behoves those amongst them who have 
a regard for Divine truth, and the eternal salvation of their souls, to 
consider if they can be safe in holding communion with a Church, 
which rejects sacraments established on Divine authority ! 


252 


white’s confutation 


of bread and wine, in the Supper of the Lord, cannot 
be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the 
plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of 
a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many super- 
stitions.” And in the end of this article, is added : 

The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by 
Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, 
or worshipped.” 

EXAMINATION. 

Though Scripture does not in express words and 
terms say, that the substance of the bread and wine 
is changed in the sacrament of the eucharist : yet 
the Catholic Church, which hath received its inter- 
pretation of the words of Holy Writ from the apos- 
tles, who understood the mind of Christ , 1 teaches that 
this change must be believed with the most positive 
faith — as is manifest from the perpetual doctrine of 
the fathers, and the decrees of her councils. For, in 
the first place, Christ, who can neither tell a lie , nor 
deceive any person, expressly said of that which he 
gave his disciples to eat and drink at his last Supper 
— though it had a different appearance : ‘ THIS IS 
MY BODY:’ ‘THIS IS MY BLOOD .’ 2 And, 
lest any should imagine that the word body could, in 
this place, be understood in any other sense, than as 
that body which was given for the salvation and re- 
demption of man, Christ himself, to the words, 
‘ THIS IS MY BODY,’ also added — ■ which is given 
for you' And in like manner, lest the word blood 
might be imagined to signify anything other than that 
blood which has been shed for the remission of sins, 
to the words, ‘ THIS IS MY BLOOD,’ Christ adds 
— ‘ which shall be shed for you' to vrtt£ v/iav ixxwofitvov. 3 
From this testimony of Jesus Christ, taken in the 
simple signification which the words convey, the Ca- 
tholic Church has always believed, that Christ handed 


i 4 But we have the mind of Christ.’ 1 Cor. ii. 16. 

2 Matthew xxvi. 26, 28. a Luke xxii. 19, 20. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


253 


to his apostles his true and natural body and blood ; 
and that he bequeathed the same as meat and drink 
to the faithful for ever. 

And again, from these same words of Jesus Christ, 
by which the reality of his body and blood is proved, * 
it also necessarily follows, that there is not in the 
eucharist bread, properly so called, baked (as they 
say) in the oven ; or wine made from grapes. For 
things that are essentially different , cannot be recipro- 
cally predicated of each other : and therefore that of 
which our Lord says with truth — ‘ THIS IS MY 
BODY’ — of the same it cannot with truth be said : 
This is bread. In like manner, that of which he 
with truth says: ‘THIS IS MY BLOOD’— of the 
same it cannot with truth be said : This is wine . 
Wherefore, from these words, understood in their 
simple and proper sense, the Catholic Church hath 
defined, that it follows as a necessary consequence, 
that the whole substance of the bread, the accidents 
only remaining, is converted into the body of Christ : 
and likewise, that the substance of the wine is con- 
verted into his blood. 

But in order to understand more fully the sense of 
Christ’s words, and of the Catholic docirine deduced 
from them, it is to be observed, that, of the enuncia- 
tive words of Christ in the Sacred Scriptures (such 
are those now quoted), there are two kinds. The one 
consists of such words as have a significative force 
only: as for example — ‘ The world hateth me." 

* Lazarus is dead .’ i 2 Propositions of this kind presup- 
pose the things signified ; but they do not effect them. 
The other kind of propositions consists of such words 
as have an effective or operative force : as for example 
— ‘ Woman , thou art delivered from thy infirmity .’ 3 

* Thy son liveth .’ 4 And propositions of this kind do 
not presuppose ; but they effect the things signified : 
and therefore it is essential to their verification, that 


i John vii. 7. 

3 Luke xiii. 12. 

22 


a John xi. 14. 
4 John iv. 50. 


254 


white’s confutation 


they be first entirely pronounced, as their nature 
requires. Now, the forementioned propositions re- 
specting the eucharist, are of the latter kind ; for, 
that the words of Christ have an operative effect in 
this venerable sacrament, is most certain. Where- 
fore, that which the demonstrative pronoun points to 
in the proposition — ‘ This is my body’ — is most ob- 
vious, from the foregoing explanation. For the pro- 
noun (this) does not point to the bread ; but to that 
peculiar thing with which the attribute truly agrees 
when the proposition is finished — and that peculiar 
thing is the body of Christ. The same is to be said 
respecting the proposition : ‘ This is my blood.’ 

This doctrine of the eucharist now laid before you, 
continued for many ages undisputed in the Catholic 
Church ; so that before the time of Berengarius, a 
period of full one thousand years from its institution, 
no one ever called it into question, unless perchance 
one Bertran, a priest, who, after the eighth century, 
began to write against it in a very clandestine man- 
ner, and that too without success. For the error of 
those persons noted by the more ancient fathers of 
the Church, seems to hare consisted in their disbelief 
that Christ had assumed true flesh. And indeed when 
Berengarius started up, his heresy received but little 
support ; for all the prelates of the Church so unani- 
mously resisted it, that we do not read of a single 
bishop having consented to his doctrine : wherefore 
the Arian heresy, by which innumerable bishops were 
tainted, had much more the semblance of truth. Add 
to this, that Berengarius himself recanted his heresy 
three times, and that in the end — leaving behind him 
but few followers of his error — he died in detestation 
of it, and in the open confession of the Catholic faith. 

In confirmation of the doctrine which we have now 
explained, numerous testimonies of the ancient fathers 
may be adduced — and of them we shall here subjoin 
a few. We shall first quote Theophy] actus, who dis- 
tinctly teaches this doctrine when explaining the 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


255 


words — ‘ This is my body' “ This,” says Theophy- 
Iactus, “ which you receive. For the bread is not 
merely a figure and similitude of the body of the Lord; 
but it is converted into the very body of Christ. For 
the Lord says : ‘ THE BREAD WHICH I WILL 
GIVE, IS MY FLESH.’ He did not say, is the 
figure of my flesh ; but, ‘ IS MY FLESH.’ And, 
again, our Lord saith : — ‘ Unless you shall eat of the 
FLESH OF THE SON OF MAN.’ Do you ask, 
why then is not the flesh visible? Because of our 
infirmity, O man. For as bread and wine are of 
those things to which we are accustomed, we feel no 
abhorrence for them : but were we to see flesh and 
blood set before us we could not endure the sight — 
we should turn from it with horror : and therefore it 
is that a merciful God, condescending to our infirmity, 
preserves the appearance indeed of the bread and 
wine ; but virtually changes the elements into flesh 
and blood. Moreover, our Redeemer called this the 
blood of the New Testament, opposing it to the Old. 
For the Old Testament also had its blood, with which 
both the people and the book of the Law used to be 
sprinkled.” 1 These are the words of Theophylactus. 
And St. Chrysostom, who flourished before Theophy- 
lactus, in his homily on the treachery of Judas, ex- 
plaining the words, — ‘ THIS IS MY BODY,’ &c., 
says: “ They who are consecrated by the divine myste- 
ries understand what I say. And again our Lord took 
the cup and said,' ‘ THIS IS MY BLOOD, which 
shall be shed for many unto the remission of sins.’ 
And Judas was present when Christ said — ‘ THIS 
IS MY BLOOD.’ Speak, 0 Judas, is this the 
blood about which you had already made your bar- 
gain with the Pharisees ? — the blood which you sold 
for thirty pieces of silver ? Oh ! the mercy of Christ ! 
Oh ! the madness of Judas ! Judas had been bargained 


i Theophylact. enarrat. in Evangel. Marci c. 14. — Vide etiam 
enarrat. in c. 26, Evangelii secundum Matthseum. 


256 


white’s confutation 


with for thirty pieces of silver to sell the blood of 
Christ ; and yet Christ presented to Judas, THE 
VERY BLOOD WHICH HE HAD SOLD, in 
order that he might obtain the remission of his sins, 
if he would even then abandon his impious purpose : 
for Judas was present at, and partook of, the commu- 
nion of the glorious sacrifice.” Shortly after, Chry- 
sostom again says : “ Christ is now present — He 
who adorned the last supper — the same also conse- 
crates this our feast. For it is not man — who, by 
the consecration of the elements lying on the altar, 
makes them the body and blood of Christ ; but it is 
Christ himself who was crucified for us. The words 
are pronounced by the mouth of the priest ; but are 
consecrated by the power and grace of God. ‘THIS,’ 
saith he, ‘ IS MY BODY by these words the ele- 
ments are consecrated. And as the Scriptural words, 
— ‘Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth,’ 1 
though pronounced only once, yet always retain their 
generative effect in the operation of nature : SO, in like 
manner, the above words were spoken once only ; 
but they even unto the present day, give validity to 
the sacrifice offered on all the altars of the Church — 
and this effect they will continue to produce unto the 
coming of Christ.” 2 

And again speaking on this subject, Chrysostom 
says : “ Let us, therefore, believe God in all things, 
and let us not resist him, although what he says may 
appear absurd to our sense and notions. Grant, I 
beseech you, that His sense and His reason are su- 
preme to ours. Let us acknowledge this in all things, 
but particularly in mysteries — not confining our view 
merely to the things that lie before us, but also hold- 
ing to his words. For by his words, we cannot be 
deceived ; whereas nothing can be more easily de- 


1 Genesis i. 28. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 3, Homilia de proditione Judro. — Vide etiam tom, 
4, comment, in 2 Timoth., honnl. 2 in fine. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


257 


ceived than our own senses. His ivords cannot be 
false ; our senses are over and over again deceived. 
Since then Christ has said— ‘ THIS IS MY BODY/ 
— let us entertain no doubt of the fact, but believe it 
and view it with the eyes of our understanding/’ 1 
These are the clear and forcible words of the re- 
nowned Chrysostom. 

And St. Cyril of Jerusalem, who flourished prior 
to both Chrysostom and Theophylactus, when explain- 
ing the words of the apostle Paul on the institution 
of the eucharist, 1 Cor. c. xi., thus writes — “ There- 
fore, as Christ himself thus affirms, and saith of the 
bread, ‘ THIS IS MY BODY who can afterwards 
venture to doubt it? And as he, in like manner, 
positively assures us and saith — ‘ THIS IS MY 
BLOOD who, I ask, can doubt it, and assert that 
it is not his blood ? First, in Cana of Galilee, He, 
by his will only, changed water into wine , which 
bears a strong resemblance to blood : and shall we 
not deem him worthy of belief when he tells us, 
that he has changed wine into blood ? For if He, 
when invited to an earthly marriage, wrought this 
stupendous miracle ; shall we not much more readily 
confess that he has given his body and blood to the 
children of the bridegroom ? Wherefore, let us re- 
ceive the body and blood of Christ with the most per- 
fect certainty: for under the species of bread his 
body is given to you : and under the species of wine , 
his blood is given to you in order that you, receiving 
the body and blood of Christ, may be made partakers 
of his body and blood (xt;t$oq>6poi ywopsOa)” And a 
little further on, Cyril again says — “ Regard them 
not, theiefore, as mere bread and mere wine; for, 
according to the words of our Lord himself, they are 
THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. Though 
your sense should suggest to you that they are the 
former; yet let faith confirm you. Judge not of the 


i Obrysost. tom. 2, homil. 83. in c. 25, Evangelii secundum Matt. 
22 * 


258 


white’s confutation 


thing by your taste ; but by faith, be assured beyond 
all doubt, that you are honoured with the body and 
the blood of Christ .” 1 These are the words of Cyril 
of Jerusalem. 

We shall now produce some of the fathers of the 
Latin Church, and shall begin with St. Augustin, who 
though, like others of the ancients, he sometimes 
speaks rather obscurely on this mystery, because he 
knew that his hearers consisted not only of Christians, 
but also of catechumens and unbelievers, from whom 
the more sacred mysteries of the Christian religion 
were to be concealed ; yet he frequently speaks on it 
in as clear terms as it is possible for man to do. 
When expounding the title of the thirty-third Psalm, 
wherein we read the words : ‘And he teas carried in 
his own hands' Augustin says: “Brethren, who can 
understand how this is possible to be done by man? 
For what man is carried in his men hands ? A man 
may be carried in the hands of others , no man is car- 
ried in his oxen hands. We find not how it can be 
literally understood even of David himself ; but we do 
find how it can be understood of Christ. For Christ 
was carried in his own hands, when, committing to 
us his body, he said : ‘ THIS IS MY BODY.’ For 
he then bore that body in his own hands, &c .” 2 And 
again in his enarration on the sixty-fifth Psalm, Au- 
gustin says : “ The blood of the Lord which was shed 
was offered for homicides, I shall not call them dei- 
cides: ‘ For if they had known it, they would never 
have crucified the Lord of glory .’ 3 The blood of the 
innocent Lamb which was shed, was now offered for 
the homicides. And that very blood which they had 
shed through madness , they afterwards drank through 
grace”* In his enarration on the ninety-eighth Psalm 

1 Bibliothec. Pntrum, tom. 4, Cyrillus Hierosol. Catechesi mysta- 
g-g- 4 - 

J August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. 33 ; concio prima, versus finem. 

3 1 Cor. ii. 8. < August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. 65. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


259 


also, from which we shall quote bye and bye, Augus- 
tin supplies a clear testimony on this subject. 

St. Ambrose, too, explicitly teaches this doctrine 
of the eucharist in his fourth book “ On the Sacra- 
ments’’ — for he therein writes as follows: “ You per- 
haps say that mine is the ordinary bread. Now this 
bread is bread before the sacramental words are 
uttered : when consecrated, it becomes, from bread, 
the flesh of Christ. But let us prove this assertion. 
How can that which is bread become the body of 
Christ ? By consecration. In what words then, and 
in whose words doth the consecration consist ? In 
the words of our Lord Jesus. For in all things else 
which are said, praise is offered to God ; prayers are 
poured forth for the people, the king, such as are in 
high station, and so on : but when the priest arrives 
at the consecration of the venerable sacrament, he no 
longer uses his oum , but the words of Christ. The 
word of Christ, therefore, consecrates this sacrament. 
What is the word of Christ? It is that, indeed, 
whereby all things have been created. The Lord com- 
manded it — and the Heavens were made. The Lord 
commanded it — and the earth was made. The Lord 
so commanded — and the seas were made. The Lord 
commanded — and every creature was produced. You 
clearly see then the omnipotence of the word of Christ. 
But if the word of our Lord Jesus be so efficacious 
as to call into existence things that were not ; how 
much more efficacious must it be in changing the na- 
ture of things that are! The heaven was not — the 
sea was not — the earth was not . But hear the Scrip- 
ture saying: — ‘He spoke — and they were made 
‘ He commanded — and they were created.’’ My answer 
to you, therefore, is : — it was not the body of Christ 
before consecration ; but after consecration it is, I tell 
you, the body of Christ. He spoke — and it was made. 
He commanded — -and it was created.” 1 And in the fifth 


i Ambrosius tom. 4, lib. 4, “ De Sacramentis," c. 4. — Vide etiam 
in eodem tom. lib. de iis qui mystcriis initiantur, e. 9. 


260 


white’s confutation 


chapter of the same book, considering the words of 
the institution of this sacrament, St. Ambrose says : 
“ Observe,” saith he, “ each and every particular. 
Jesus Christ, on the day before his passion, took bread 
into his holy hands. Before consecration , it is bread : 
but when the icords of Christ are pronounced , it is the 
body of Christ. Finally, listen to the Lord himself 
saying: ‘ Take and eat ye all of this — THIS IS MY 
BODY.’ In like manner also, before the words of 
Christ are employed, the chalice is full of wine and 
water ; but when the words of Christ have opei'ated , 
they are changed into the very blood by wmich the 
w r orld has been redeemed. See, therefore, in what 
various ways the word of Christ is powerful in chang- 
ing all things. Moreover, our Lord Jesus himself tes- 
tifies to us, that we receive his body and his blood ; 
and shall we doubt the truth of his testimony V n St. 
Ambrose, continuing to argue in this manner, adds, 
in the first chapter of his sixth book on the sacra- 
ments, that Christ left the appearance of bread and 
wfine in the sacrament of the eucharist, lest the sight 
of gore should create in us horror and disgust . 1 2 

Pope Leo the First, in one of his sermons on fasting, 
says: “For as the Lord declares: ‘Unless you eat 
of the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink of his 
blood, you shall not have life in you ;* you should so 
partake of the communion of the sacred altar, as in 
nowise to doubt of the truth of Christ’s body and 
blood. For what is believed through faith, is received 
with the mouth : and it is in vain that ‘ amen’ is an- 
swered by those, who dispute against that which is 
received .” 3 Again, in one of his epistles, when re- 
proving such as denied that true flesh had been as- 
sumed by Christ, Leo says : “ They do not see how 
they are by their own blindness driven to this danger- 


1 Ambrosius tom. 4, lib. 4, “ De Sacramentis,” c. 5. 

2 Ambros. tom. 4, lib. 6, “ De Sacramentis,” c. 1. 

5 Leo de jejunio septimi mensis, serm. 6. 


OF CIIURCII-OF-ENCLANDISM. 


261 


ous position — that they can believe neither in the 
truth of Christ’s passion, nor in that of his resur- 
rection : for both are rendered void in our Saviour, 
if it be disbelieved that he assumed human flesh. In 
what gloomy ignorance have these people been hith- 
erto immersed, in what sloth and torpor have they 
lain, not to have learned, either by hearing or reading, 
a thing which throughout the Church of Christ is so 
universally acknowledged, that even the tongues of 
infants proclaim the truth of the body and blood of 
Christ in the sacrament of our common faith ! For 
in the mystic distribution of the spiritual aliment, his 
body is given and received, in order that we who re- 
ceive it may, by virtue of the celestial food, be trans- 
formed into the flesh of Him, who hath assumed our 
flesh.” 1 These are the words of the great and learned 
Leo. The author of the sermon ascribed to St. Cy- 
prian, a man who flourished at an early period and 
w r as distinguished for his learning, most distinctly lays 
down the doctrine of the Church on the sacrament 
of the eucharist. “ The bread,” says he, “ which the 
Lord handed to his disciples, being changed, not in 
its appearance, but in its nature, was made flesh by 
the omnipotence of his word. And as, in the person 
of Christ, his humanity was visible, and his Divinity 
lay concealed ; so, in the visible sacrament, a divine 
essence hath ineffably infused itself, in order that we 
should regard the sacrament with religious devotion.” 2 3 

Moreover, this doctrine was so thoroughly estab- 
lished among the ancient doctors of the Catholic faith, 
that they used it as the argument for refuting different 
heresies which arose in their time. By the argument 
of the reality of Christ’s presence in the eucharist, 
St. Irenmus refutes those who denied the resurrection 
of the flesh? By the same argument St. Leo the 


I Leo epist. 23. ad clerum et plebem Constantinopolitance urbis. 

* Inter opera Cypriani, serm. dc ccena Domini. 

3 Iren. adv. here?, lib. 4. c. 34.— Vide lib. 5, non longe a principio. 


262 


white’s confutation 


Great refutes those who denied that Christ had as- 
sumed Jiesh . 1 And the first General Council of Ephe- 
sus refuted Nestorius, who would not admit that Jesus 
was at the same time God and man, by the following 
argument — the Eucharist could not give us life , if it 
were the flesh of man only , and not also the flesh 
of the Son of God . 2 And if in the Scriptures the 
body of Christ, or the eucharist, be sometimes called 
bread, it is so called because of its being consecrated 
from bread : as the serpent is in Scripture called a 
rod , because the rod of Aaron was changed into a 
serpent . 3 And as the wine is called water , because 
the water was changed into wine by Christ . 4 Again, 
the eucharist is called bread ; because it retains the 
accidents of the former bread, and nourishes as bread. 
It is called bread in the same manner as Adam is 
called dust; because he was made from dust and re- 
tained within him the qualities of dust . 5 Hence also, 
the ancients sometimes call the eucharist the sign of 
the body, the figure of the body ; but in such a man- 
ner, that it is itself at the same time the very thing 
signified and figured. It is a sign, because it does not 
appear to corporal eyes to be what in reality it is : it 
is the thing signified, because it hides within itself 
something different from what it externally appears 
to be. It seems to be one thing exteriorly : it is un- 
derstood to be another interiorly. 

We shall next produce the authority of Councils 
in support of this doctrine. The Catholic doctrine, 
as now laid before you, has been clearly defined in 
the General Council of Lateran, under Pope Innocent 
the Third. And as the first General Councils of 
Nice and Ephesus, by applying to the ancient Catho- 
lic truth these new terms, 0^0x010$ and Oeot 6 xo{, protected 
that truth in former ages against the frauds of Arius 

1 Leo serm. 6. de jejunio septimi mensis. — Vide etiam epist. 23. 

2 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, epist. Concilii Ephesini ad Nestorium. 

3 Exodus vii. 12. 4 John ii. 9. 5 Gen. iii. 19. 


OF CHUItCH-OF-ENGLANDiSAL 


^03 


and Nestorius ; so the fathers of the Council of Late- 
ran, in imitation of their pious predecessors, by ap- 
plying to the ancient doctrine of the eucharist the new 
term transubstantiation , have providently guarded it 
against heretical fraud. And so effectual has this 
distinctive term been, that by means of it, as by a 
certain symbol, Catholics are to be now distinguished, 
with respect to this doctrine, from innovators of all 
kinds and denominations. The decree of the Council 
of Lateran on this doctrine, is as followeth — “ There 
is indeed one universal Church of the faithful, outside 
which no one can be saved. In this Church Jesus 
Christ is himself both the Priest and the Sacrifice. 
His body and blood are truly contained in the sacra- 
ment of the altar under the appearances of bread and 
wine ; the bread being by the divine power transub- 
stantiated into his body, and the wine into his blood, 
in order that, to complete the mystery of unity, we 
may receive of His body, what he received of ours.” 1 

The General Council of Constance condemned the 
forty-five articles of John Wickleff, and pronounced 
himself to be a heretic. The first among his articles 
runs as follows : — “ The substance of material bread, 
and in like manner the substance of material wine, 
remain in the sacrament of the altar.” And the third 
of these articles states : — “ Christ is not identically 
and really in this sacrament, in his proper corporal 
presence.” 2 And in this same council, rope Martin 
the Fifth decreed, that every person suspected of 
heresy should be asked — “ Whether he believes, that, 
after the consecration of the priest, the material bread 
and the material wine cease to be in the sacrament 
of the altar, under the veils of bread and wine ; but 
that it contains the true and perfect Christ, who suf- 
fered on the cross, and now sits at the right hand of 


1 Tom. 2, Conciliorum, Concil. Generate Lateran., sub Innocentio 
tertio Papa, c. 1. 

2 Tom. 2, Conciliorum, Concil. Constant., 3css. 8, Articuli Joannis 
Wickleff, art. 1, 3. 


204 


white’s confutation 


the Father. Also, whether he believes and maintains, 
that, after the consecration of the priest, there is, un- 
der the species of bread only, and without the species 
of wine, the true flesh and blood, soul and deity of 
Christ, and the whole Christ, and the same body 
absolutely, and under eithersoever of these species 
singly.” 1 

'the General Council of Florence, too, thus defines 
respecting the eucharist : “ The words of our Sa- 
viour, whereby He produceth this sacrament, consti- 
tute the form of the sacrament. For the priest, speak- 
ing in the person of Christ, produceth this sacrament. 
Because by virtue of these words, the substance of 
the bread is converted into the body of Christ, and 
the substance of the wine into his blood : so yet that 
Christ is contained entire under the species of the 
bread, and entire under the species of the wine ; so, 
too, that under any part of the consecrated host and 
of the consecrated wine, when separated, Christ is 
entire.” 2 Finally, the General Council of Trent de- 
clares the same doctrine respecting the eucharist, and 
punishes with anathema those who gainsay it. 3 

Since it is evident from what has been already said 
on this subject, that, according to the doctrine of the 
Catholic Church, a change of the substance of bread 
and wine is effected in the eucharist; it certainly 
follows that this doctrine is neither “ repugnant to the 
plain words of Scripture — nor overthroweth the na- 
ture of a sacrament — nor giveth occasion to any 
superstition.” But, on the contrary, this just conclu- 
sion is arrived at, that the doctrine which you teach 
in the second paragraph of the 28th article, is opposed 
to the Catholic faith, and is therefore deservedly to 
be execrated. This doctrine principally arises from 


1 Concil. Constant., sess. 45, sea ultima. 

2 Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Florentin. in decreto Eugenii quarti 
ad Armenos. 

3 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 13 ; “ De Eucharist© Sacramento,” c. 1, 
4. ct can. 1, 2. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDI9M. 


265 


incredulity, whilst you attempt to reduce the law 
of faith to the standard of human reason ; and — as if 
the capacity of the human intellect were the mea- 
sure of the omnipotence of Christ — you do not believe, 
because, forsooth ! you do not understand. You, my 
brethren, deserve the severest reprehension for allow- 
ing yourselves to be deceived by little captious cavils, 
and — going on from bad to worse — imposing upon 
others, as St. Paul says, ‘ by philosophy and vain 
deceit ; according to the tradition of men, according 
to the rudiments of the world, and not according to 
Christ .’ 1 “ The very same power,” saith St. Augus- 
tin, “ which brought forth through the virgin womb 
of an inviolate mother, the limbs of the INFANT ; 
afterwards, when he had become a man, introduced 
those limbs through the door, though shut. If reason 
be appealed to respecting this, it will not be wonderful ; 
if an example be demanded, the instance will not be a 
solitary one. Let us admit that God is able to do , what 
we must confess oursel ves unable to investigate. In such 
cases, the whole cause of the thing done, consists in the 
power of him who does it .” 2 And in another of his 
works, St. Augustin says ; “ The first heresy among 
the disciples of Christ was occasioned by the hard- 
ness, as it were, of his words. For when he said : 
‘ Except you eat of the FLESH of the Son of Man, 
and drink his BLOOD, you shall not have life in you : 3 
they, not understanding him, said one to another : 

* This saying is hard, and who can bear it ?'* They, 
declaring that this saying is hard, separated them- 
selves from Christ, and he remained with the other 
twelve. When they who remained suggested to Jesus 
that the others were scandalized by his saying, he 
asked them — ‘ Will you also go away?’ Whereupon 
Peter answered him : 4 Lord, to whom shall we go ? 
thou hast the words of eternal life . 5 Understand, we 


i Coloss. ii. 8. * August, tom. 2, epist. 3, ad Volusianum. 

3 John vL 54. * John vi. 61. 5 John vi. 68, 69. 

23 


266 


white’s confutation 


beseech you — and, as little ones, learn piety. Did 
Peter now comprehend the mystery contained in this 
saying of our Lord ? No : as yet he understood it 
not ; but the words which he did not understand , he 
piously believed to be good. If, therefore, the saying 
be hard, and not as yet understood, let it be hard to 
the impious ; but to thee let it be softened by piety : 
for, whenever it shall be solved, it will become oil to 
thee, and will penetrate even to thy bones ,” 1 These 
are the words of Augustin. Having now discussed 
the doctrine taught in the second paragraph of this the 
twenty-eighth article, it remains for us to touch on 
the assertions contained in the conclusion of it. These 
assertions are four in number : for it is laid down in 
the last paragraph, that the eucharist was not by 
Christ’s ordinance “reserved” — “lifted up” — “carried 
about,” or “worshipped.” We shall now examine 
them severally in the order in which they occur. 
With respect to the first assertion, our answer is — 
Catholics are not very solicitous as to whether the 
eucharist be reserved in compliance with Christ’s or- 
dinance; but since they know that from the very time of 
the apostles, it has been always honourably set apart 
and preserved in the Church for the viaticum of the 
dying, they rightly conclude with St. Augustin, that — 
“ What the universal Church holds, what was not in- 
stituted by councils, but hath been always retained, is 
most properly believed to be founded on apostolic au- 
thority alone .” 2 And deservedly do they reprove you, 
my brethren, and all others who contemn the Catholic 
usage, applying to you the words of Paul the apostle : 
4 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no 
such custom, nor the Church of God .’ 3 

To the second assertion, our reply is — Catholics 
do not teach that the custom of carrying about this 


1 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. 54. 

2 August, tom. 7, de baptis. contra Donatist. lib. 4, c. 24. 

8 1 Cor. xi. 1 6. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 267 

venerable sacrament in public processions was or- 
dained by Christ ; yet the fathers of the Council of 
Trent approve the rite, as suitable for proclaiming the 
gratitude which Catholics feel for this singular benefit 
of Christ, and for reproving the petulance of heretics. 
“ For it is most just and reasonable,” say the fathers 
of the council, “ that there should be certain stated 
holidays, on which all Christians may, by a singular 
and rare token, testify the gratitude of their hearts, 
and show how thankful they are to our common Lord 
and Redeemer for this ineffable and purely Divine 
gift of his bounty, by which are represented the vic- 
tory and triumph of his death. And thus, indeed, 
ought victorious truth to celebrate its triumph over 
falsehood and heresy — to the end that its adversaries 
being placed in view of so great splendour and joy of 
the universal Church, may pine away through weak- 
ness and debility; or that filled with shame and con- 
fusion, they may at length return to their senses.” 1 

The Old Testament affords us a type of this cere- 
mony in the ark of the covenant of the Lord, which, 
sometimes by the command of God, and at others by 
the devotion of the priests, king and people, used to 
be borne and carried about in solemn procession, for 
the purpose of imploring the Divine aid and mercy : 2 
and that the ark was a figure of the eucharist, is 
clearly proved from this passage of the 98th Psalm, 
— * Adore his footstool.’ 3 St. Ambrose and St. Au- 
gustin also, whose testimonies we shall hereafter sub- 
join, teach us that what is literally understood of the 
ark of the covenant, is mystically declared respecting 
the eucharist.' 

To the third point, we reply — that although the 
elevation , which properly belongs to the sacrifice of 

1 Concil. Trident, scss. 13, “ De Sanctissimo Eucharistice Sacra- 
mento,” c. 5. — Vide can. 6, ibidem. 

2 Josue iii. 3, 4, 14, 15, 16; Josue vi. 6, 7, 8; 1 Kings iv. 3, 4; 
xiv. 18; and 2 Kings vi. 10, 11, 12, &c. 

3 Psalm xcviii. 5. 4 Paralipomenon xxviii. 2. 


268 


white’s confutation 


the mass, (whereof we shall bye and bye take an op- 
portunity of speaking) have no ordinance of Christ 
enforcing its observance ; yet in as much as this rite 
hath its origin in the sacred Scriptures, the practice 
of Catholics in observing it, is both pious and rational. 
For the elevation of the unbloody sacrifice, represents, 
at the present day, the bloody sacrifice once elevated 
on the altar of the cross ; just as the elevation of the 
serpent by Moses in the desert, mystically represented 
the sacrifice of Calvary , at a period long before it had 
been offered . 1 Observe, moreover, these words pro- 
nounced by Christ : ‘ Do this for a commemoration of 
mef 2 — that means, as the apostle Paul explains the 
words, ‘For as often as you shall eat this bread, and 
drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the 
Lord, until he come .’ 3 

Let us now come to the adoration , which is the last 
point. As it is clear from what has been already 
said, that the eucharist is the body of Christ, the Son 
of God — it therefore follows, that the eucharist, or the 
Son of God in the eucharist, should be adored even with 
divine honour. For as external or corporal adoration, 
exhibited by means of genuflexion, bowing of the head, 
or other mark of respect, is but a profession or ac- 
knowledgment of the divinity believed in ; it is there- 
fore evident, that the worship, which theologians call 
latria,* should be paid to Him as to the true God, 
no less in this sacrament, than it is in every other 
place. And indeed the sacred Scripture commands that 
this worship shall be paid to Christ , 4 and abounds with 
instances of its having been paid him . 5 Nay, his body 

1 ‘ And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the 
Son of Man be lifted up.’ John iii. 14. 

2 Luke xxii. 19. 3 1 Cor. xi. 26. 

* The worship of latria here spoken of, in Greek V.ar^ua, signi- 
fies the most humble and devoted religious worship of which man is 
capable, and is exclusively reserved for, and is paid to God alone. 

4 Psalm xxi. 44 ; Psalm Ixxi. 96 ; Philip, ii. and Ileb. i. 

Matthew chapters ii. viii. xiv. xv. and xxviii. — Also Luke xxiv. 
and John ix. 


OF CHtJRCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


269 


and blood, soul and humanity, as well in the sacra- 
ment as out of it, should, wheresoever they are, be 
adored with the same kind of worship. For although 
710 one of these be Christ, in like manner as neither 
the hand nor the head of the king, is the king’s per- 
son; yet, as he who kisses or strikes his hand or his 
head, is, with truth, said to kiss or strike the king ; so 
he who adores the body or the soul of Christ, and his 
humanity altogether, is considered to adore no other 
than the Son of God, and God himself : for these 
subsist in the person of the Son of God, neither have 
they a subsistence different from him. Wherefore, 
when the Jews wounded the body of Christ, they 
wounded no other than the Lord of glory, and ac- 
cording to St. Paul, ‘ they crucified the Lord of glory.’ 1 
Whence St. Augustin argues against the Eunomians 
and Arians in the following manner. — “ If the Son by 
his nature be not God, but a creature only, he is neither 
to be adored or worshipped as God ; for Saint Paul 
the apostle condemns such worship, saying— ‘ and 
they worshipped and served the creature rather than 
the Creator, who is blessed for ever.’ 2 Again, Augus- 
tin subjoins : “ But they (the heretics) will reply to 
these arguments and say : Why do you adore, together 
with the divinity, his flesh, which you do not deny to 
be a creature ? and why do you serve it equally as 
you do the Divinity ? 1 adore (rejoins Augustin) the 

flesh of the Lord, nay, the perfect humanity in Christ, 
because it was assumed by the Divinity, and united 
to the Deity ; so that I do not acknowledge it to be 
a different, but one and the same God and man, the 
Son of God. In fine, if you separate man from God, 
as Photinus, or Paul of Samosata did, then I never 
will believe in or serve that God. For, suppose any 
one amongst us were to find the purple, or the royal 
diadem lying on the ground — would he attempt to 
worship them ? But when the king is clothed in 


1 Cor. ii. 8. 
23 * 


2 Romans i. 25, and Galat. iv. 8. 


270 


white’s confutation 


them, whosoever contemptuously refuses to worship* 
them together with the king, incurs the danger of 
death. So in like manner, whosoever contemptuously 
refuses to adore in Christ our Lord, not his bare hu- 
manity, alone ; but united to his Divinity — the one 
Son of God, true God and true man — the same shall 
suffer the pains of eternal death .” * 1 

The ancient fat hers teach, in the most explicit terms, 
that the worship of latria is to be paid to the eucha- 
rist. St. Augustin, on expounding the following words 
of the ninety-eighth Psalm — * and adore his footstool,* 
says: “ Our Lord explains to me what his footstool 
is, when he saith : ‘ The earth is my footstool.* This 
confuses me ; for I am afraid to adore the earth, lest 
He who made the heavens and the earth should con- 
demn me. Again, I am afraid not to adore the foot- 
stool of my Lord ; for the Psalm commands me, say- 
ing : ‘ Adore his footstool.* What, I ask, is his foot- 
stool ? and the Scripture answers me : ‘ The earth is 
my footstool .’ 2 Doubtful what to do, I have recourse 
to Christ — I consult him in this difficulty, and I find 
how the earth can he adored without impiety — how, 
without impiety, his footstool can he adored. For 
Christ took upon himself earth of the earth ; for flesh 
is of the earth, and he took flesh of the flesh of Mary. 
And because while in this life he walked in the flesh, 
he gave us this very same flesh to eat for our salvation. 
And as no one eateth this flesh, without first adoring 
it ; we find how the footstool of our Lord may be 
adored ; and not only we do not sin by adoring, but 
we do sin by not adoring it .” 3 

Before Augustin, St. Ambrose, considering these 
same words of this Psalm, saith : “We must not re- 


* The term “ worship” is here used to signify marked respect ; 
just in the limited sense that all the people of these kingdoms, with, 
out distinction of religion, apply it to judges, barristers, and even to 
magistrates, when on the bench. 

1 August, tom. 10, de verbis Domini, serm. 58. 2 Isaias lxvh 1. 

•3 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. xcviii. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


271 


gard this as the ordinary footstool of men : for we 
are not to imagine that God is a corporal or finite 
being, or that his footstool is a prop placed under his 
feet. Neither does the Scripture tell us to adore any 
thing except God ; for therein it is written : ‘ The 
Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and him only shalt 
thou serve.’ 1 How then could the prophet (Isaias), 
who was reared under the Law, and educated in the 
Law, give a commandment contrary to the Law? 
This, therefore, is no trifling question, and consequently 
we should employ the utmost diligence in considering 
what the footstool is. For in another part of the Scrip- 
tures we read: ‘The heaven is my throne, and the earth 
is my footstool .’ a But we must not adore the earth ; for 
the earth is the creature of God. Y et let us see wheth- 
er the prophet does not tell us that that earth is to be 
adored, which the Lord Jesus took upon himself in 
the assumption of the flesh. By the footstool, therefore, 
is understood the earth , and by the earth the flesh of 

Christ, WHICH FLESH WE AT THIS HAY ADORE. IN THE 

mysteries, and which (as we have said above) the apos- 
tles adored in the Lord Jesus.” * 3 

St. Chrysostom, who was one of the Greek fathers, 
says in his twenty-fourth homily on the 1st Corinthians, 
“ The magi reverenced this body in the stable — and 
ungodly men and barbarians, after they had completed 
a long journey, adored it with a profound fear, and 
holy awe. Let us, then, who are citizens of heaven, 
imitate at least these barbarians. For they, though 
they only saw the body stretched in a manger in the 
stable, and beheld none of the things which you now- 
do, approached it with the highest reverence, and 
with a devout and trembling fear. Whereas you be- 
hold the body of Christ, not lying in a manger, but 
upon the altar: you see, not a woman holding it in her 


l Matthew iv. 10. 2 Isaias Ixvi. 1. 

3 Ambros. tom. 2, De Spiritu Sancto ad Grafian August, lib. 3. c. 


12 . 


272 


white’s confutation 


arms, but a priest present before you, and the Spirit 
most abundantly diffused over the Sacrifice. And 
when you behold the body of Christ, you are not 
uninstructed as they were ; but you know his power, 
and are acquainted with the whole administration, 
and are ignorant of none of the things which he per- 
formed, but are initiated in them all .” 1 Theodoret 
also, in speaking of the symbols after consecration , 
thus saith : — “ They are understood and believed to 
be what they have been made ; and are adored as 
being what they are believed to be .” 2 Finally, St. 
Paul the apostle clearly shows that the eucharist is 
to be adored, when he says that some do not discern 
the body of the Lord ; 3 that is, to use the words of 
St. Augustin, do not distinguish it from “ all other 
food, by the veneration singularly due to it .” 4 And 
what, we ask, is this veneration “which is singularly 
due to the body,” but that whereby man, knowing in 
his rational soul that it is the body of the Lord, pro- 
fesses his belief of the same, by an external adoration 
thereof? 


CHAPTER XXVIII. 

The Twenty-Ninth Article examined. 

In this article, entitled “ Of the Wicked, which eat 
not the Body of Christ, in the use of the Lord’s Sup- 
per,” you, my Protestant brethren, teach as follows. 
— “The wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, 
although they do carnally and visibly press with their 
teeth (as Saint Augustin saith) the sacrament of the 
body and blood of Christ, yet in nowise are they par- 
takers of Christ, but rather, to their condemnation, 
do eat and drink the sign or sacrament of so great a 
thing.” 


l Chrysost. tom. 4, Comment, in 1 Cor. homil. 24. 
a Theodoretus tom. 4, dialog. 2. Eranistes ct Orthodoxus. 

8 1 Cor. xi. 29. 4 August, tom. 2, epist. 118, ad Januar. c. 3. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


273 


EXAMINATION. 

When Saint Paul, in his first Epistle to the Corin- 
thians, chapter xi. verses 27 & 29, says, — ‘Whosoever 
shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord 
unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the 
blood of the Lord — For he that eateth and drinketh 
unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment* to himself, 
not discerning the body of the Lord/ — the apostle 
thereby teaches, that the wicked receive in the eucha- 
rist the body and blood of Christ, although they receive 
it unworthily and to their condemnation. It is thus 
that the doctors of the Catholic Church, ancient as 
well as modern, explain the passage. But you, my 
Protestant brethren, teach in this article, a doctrine 
the very reverse of that of the apostle ; you teach the 
common error of the “ Sacramentarians” — namely, 
that such as are void of a lively faith do not receive 
the true body of Christ in the eucharist : and then 
in order to hide the appearance of innovation, and to 
support your error, you distort the words of St. Au- 
gustin, and force them to convey a meaning the re- 
verse of what he intended, as we shall now show from 
his own writings. 

Every one acquainted with the writings of St. Au- 
gustin knows, that, according to his doctrine, the eat- 
ing of the body and the drinking of the blood are two- 
fold ; the one sacramental — the other spiritual. Ac- 
cording to St. Augustin, all are said to eat the body 
and drink the blood of Christ sacramentally , who 
receive them in the sacrament of the eucharist, where- 
in his body and blood are verily contained under the 
appearances of bread and wine, whether they receive 
them worthily and to their salvation, or whether they 
do not. But those are said to eat the body and drink 
the blood of Christ spiritually , who, by faith and cha- 

* In the Protestant translation of the Bible, the word judicium is 
rendered into English by a still stronger term than “judgment;” for 
we there read — ‘he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and 
drinketh damnation to himself.’ 


274 


white’s confutation 


rity, are united to, and incorporated with, and made 
living members of Christ. According to this, the 
latter mode of eating the flesh and drinking the blood 
of Christ, St. Augustin constantly teaches, that un- 
believers and such as are void of charity do not eat 
his body and drink his blood — and no Catholic denies 
the truth of this doctrine ; for without faith enlivened 
by charity, no one can be incorporated with Christ, 
and made a living member of his mystical body. But 
on the other hand, according to the former mode of 
eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ, St. 
Augustin invariably teaches, as do all Catholics, that 
the wicked and such as are void of a lively faith, 
verily receive in the eucharist (although unworthily 
and to their condemnation), not the signs only, but the 
thing signified. 

In the first passage which we -shall quote from the 
works of this learned father, and which is written 
against the Donatists on the subject of baptism, he 
clearly lays down the foregoing doctrine. “ For,” 
saith he, “ as Judas, to whom our Lord handed the 
little portion, did not, by receiving what was bad, but 
by badly receiving it, afford a habitation to the devil 
within him ; so, in like manner, whosoever receives 
unworthily the sacrament of the Lord, does not, 
because he is himself bad, render the sacrament bad ; 
neither does it follow, that because he receives it not 
to his salvation, he therefore receives nothing : for the 
body of the Lord, and the blood of the Lord, were 
also given to those of whom the apostle said — 4 He 
that eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment 
to himself .’ 1 Such is the clear testimony of Augustin 
so far . 2 And again in his sixty-second epistle, he thus 
writes concerning the traitor Judas : “ The Lord 
bears with Judas, a devil, a thief, and a seller of his 
Master. He permits him to receive among his guilt- 


1 1 Cor. xi. 29. 

2 August, tom. 7, de Baptis. contra Donatist. lib. 5, c. 8. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 275 

less disciples, that which the faithful know to be the 
price of our redemption .” l And again, expounding 
these words of the twenty-first Psalm : ‘ All the fat 
ones* of the earth have eaten and have adored, ’ 2 
Augustin thus writes : “ In this passage of Scripture, 
by the fat, or rich ones of the earth, are to be under- 
stood the proud. And, indeed, this distinction is by 
no means made in vain ; for of the poor the Scripture 
had already said : ‘ The poor shall eat, and shall be 
filled.’* But here it saith : ‘ All the rich ones of the 
earth, have eaten and have adored.’ And they have 
adored, because they have drawn nigh unto the altar 
of Christ, and have received of his body and blood : 
yet they adore only, they are not likewise filled — for 
they do not follow his example.” 4 From these, and 
numerous other passages which we may adduce, it is 
manifest that St. Augustin’s opinion and that of the 
Catholic doctors of the present day, exactly coincide 
on this question. But we shall now come to the very 
passage alluded to in the Protestant article. St. Au- 
gustin there speaks of the spiritual eating and drink- 
ing, and consequently, my brethren, he, thereby, in 
nowise countenances your error, which is concerning 
the sacramental eating and drinking. But we shall 
submit to the judgment of the candid reader the en- 
tire passage, which is found in his twenty-sixth trea- 
tise on the Gospel of John. In this treatise, St. Au- 
gustin, considering these words of the Gospel : ‘ He 
that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth 
in me, and I in him,’ 5 thus writes : “ To eat his flesh 
and to drink his blood, is, therefore, the way by which 
to abide in Christ, and to have Christ abiding in us- 


i August, tom. 2, epist. G2, contra Donatistarum pertinaciam.— 
Vide cpist. 163 ; ct tom. 9, exposit. in Joan, tract. 6. 

* ‘ All the fat ones of the earth’ — in the Latin Vulgate, oinnes 
pingues terra*. Augustin reads this passage, ‘ all the rich ones of 
the earth’ — omnes divites terra?. 

* Psalm xxi. 30. 3 Psalm xxi. 27. 

4 August, tom. 2, epist. 120, c. 27, ad Honoratum. 5 John vi. 57. 


276 


white’s confutation 

And consequently he that abideth not in Christ, and 
he in whom Christ doth not abide, does not, it is cer- 
tain, eat His flesh or drink His blood SPIRITU- 
ALLY,* though carnally and visibly he press with his 

* Nothing can be more manifest— nothing more reprehensible — 
than the disingenuousness resorted to by the framers of the Thirty- 
Nine Articles in wilfully garblingthis passage of St. Augustin, and 
thereby foully misrepresenting the doctrine taught by that ancient 
and eminent father of the Church. The object sought by those 
who descended to means so unworthy, evidently was, that they may 
give to their innovation the semblance of antiquity — knowing that 
in times of general confusion and revolution, such as those in which 
they lived, it would be difficult for the orthodox Christians who still 
preserved, in its original apostolic purity, the true doctrine of Augus- 
tin, to make the great bulk of the English nation sensible of the 
fraud thus practised upon them in the name of religion. Those days 
of confusion are now, thank Heaven ! gone by ; and hence we hope 
that those who adopt the Thirty -Nine Articles as their creed will duly 
weigh and examine them — will inquire upon what authority they 
are based — and how far they are consistent with truth. That the 
article under examination in the present chapter, is not consistent 
with truth ; but is attempted to be foisted on Christians by means of 
the suppression of truth , will be fully apparent to all who compare 
the garbled extract from Augustin, contained in the 21) th article, with 
the unmutilated passage fairly translated above. It must be evident 
to modern Protestants that the framers of their articles and the 
founders of their church, by no means despised the authority of the 
ancient fathers ; but that they, on the contrary, held those holy and 
learned men in the highest possible estimation — for w’ere the case 
otherwise, they never would have striven to make it appear that the 
articles of the Protestant religion were countenanced by them. 
When speaking in the beginning of this note, of the doctrine falsely 
ascribed to Augustin, we said that the quotation from his works is 
“ wilfully garbled” in the article now under discussion. That it is 
“ garbled” must be already manifest to our readers from comparing 
it with the entire quotation given m the text ; and that it is “ wil- 
fully ” garbled must be admitted by every scholar who reads, in the 
original, the passage referred to; for it was impossible that men, 
having even the most superficial knowledge of the Latin language, 
could, except they did so wilfully, give to his words a construction 
wholly different from what the author of them intended. What a 
truly painful reflection it is, that men when defining one of the most 
solemn articles of faith, should have recourse to fraud and imposi- 
tion ! But is it not still more painful to reflect that millions and 
millions of well meaning Church-of-England men have been led 
astray by the semblance of antiquity thus fraudulently given to in- 
novation ! 

Here follows the original of the passage above translated — Au- 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


277 


teeth the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. 
But rather doth that man eat and drink to his own 
condemnation the sacrament of so great a thing; 
because he, when unclean , presumed to approach the 
sacrament of Christ, which none receive worthily , but 
they who are clean — regarding whom the Scripture 
saith : ‘ Blessed are the clean of heart : for they shall 
see God .’ * 1 These are the distinct and unequivocal 
words of Augustin . 2 And again in his eleventh 
sermon on the words of the Lord, treating of the same 
passage of the Gospel, he delivers his opinion so clearly 
on this point, as to leave no room for tergiversation. 
“ In what sense,” asks St. Augustin, “ are we to un- 
derstand these words of Christ : ‘ He that eateth my 
flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in 
him V 3 Shall we be able to include under them those 
of whom the apostle saith — that, though they eat the 
very flesh and drink the very blood of Jesus Christ, 
yet they eat and drink judgment to themselves I 4 
And did Judas, who impiously betrayed and sold his 
Master, although, as St. Luke the Evangelist de- 
clares , 6 he ate and drank, together with the other 
disciples, the very first Sacrament of the FLESH 
AND BLOOD of Jesus Christ, 'produced in his own 
hands ; did Judas, I ask, abide in Christ, or Christ in 
him ? In fine, do many who, with hypocritical hearts, 

gustinus, considerans verba ilia Evangelii — ‘ Qui manducat carncm 
meam, et bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet et ego in illo,’ sic 
scribit : “ Hoc est ergo manducare illam escam, et ilium bibere po- 
tum, in Christo manere, et ilium manentem in se habere. Ac per 
hoc, qui non manet in Christo, et in quo non manet Christus, procul 
dubio nec manducat spiritualiter carnem ejus, nec bibit ejus san- 
guinem, licet carnaliter et visibiliter premat dentibus Sacramcntum 
Corporis et Sanguinis Christi ; scd magis tantce rei Sacramcntum ad 
judicium sibi manducat et bibit, quia immundiis pnesumpsit r.d 
Christi accedere Sacramenta, quae aliquis non digne sumit, nisi qui 
mundus est : de quibus dicitur — ‘ Beati mundi corde ; quoniam ipsi 
Deum vidibunt.’ < 

1 Mat. v. 8. 

2 August, tom. 9, exposit. in Evangel. Joan, tract. 26. 

3 John vi. 57. < 1 Cor. vi. 29. s Luke xxii. 21. 

24 


278 


white’s confutation 


eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ — or who, 
after eating and drinking them, apostatize ; do they 
abide in Christ or Christ in them ? No : but there is 
a certain manner of eating the flesh and drinking the 
blood of Christ, according to which he that eateth 
and drinketh, abides in Christ, and Christ in him. 
Therefore, in order to abide in Christ and to have 
Christ abide in him, it is not enough that a man eat 
the flesh and drink the blood of Christ, after any man- 
ner ; but after the particular manner which the Lord 
had in view T , when he pronounced the foregoing 
words .” 1 

Now, my Protestant brethren, since you esteem St. 
Augustin as a learned and holy man, we shall conclude 
this chapter by quoting from his works one passage 
on the spiritual eating, which you will find well wor- 
thy of your serious attention. The passage is con- 
tained in his twenty-seventh Treatise on the Gospel 
of Saint John, where he writes as follows: “We have 
already mentioned, brethren, that our Lord hath 
granted, that by eating of his flesh and drinking of 
his blood, we should abide in him, and he in us. We, 
indeed, abide in him, when we are members of him ; 
and he abideth in us, when we are his temple. But 
in order to be members of him, ice must be joined by 
unity : and by what bond, save that of charity, can 
we be united with Him ? And whence is the charity 
of God? Ask the apostle. ‘The charity of God/ 
saith Saint Paul, ‘ is poured abroad in our hearts by 
the Ploly Ghost who is given to us .’ 2 It is the Spirit, 
therefore, which quickeneth : for the Spirit giveth life 
to our members ; yet it quickeneth no member, except 
those of the body which it animates. For instance, 
does the spirit which is within thee, O man, that by 
which thou subsistest as man, quicken any member 
which is separated from thy flesh ? Thy spirit, I call 
thy soul. Thy soul affordeth life only to the mem- 


1 August, tom. 10, serm 11, de verbis Domini. 


2 Romans v. 5. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 279 

bers which are in thy flesh ; if thou takest away any 
one member, it is no longer enlivened by thy soul ; 
because it ceases to be joined in unity to thy body. 
These things are said, in order that we may love unity , 
and that we should dread schism; for a Christian 
should dread nothing so much as to be separated 
from the body of Christ.* Because, if he be separated 
from the body of Christ, he is no member of Christ : 
If he be not a member of Christ, he is not quickened 
by the Spirit of Christ. — And the apostle saith , * 1 ‘Now, 
if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none 
of his.’ ” 2 


CHAPTER XXIX. 

The Thirtieth Article examined. 

In this Article, entitled “ Of both kinds,” the 
Church of England teaches — “ The Cup of the Lord 
is not to be denied to the lay people : for both the 
parts of the Lord’s Sacrament, by Christ’s ordinance 
and commandment, ought to be ministered to all 
Christian men alike.” 

EXAMINATION. 

In the New Testament, Christ instituted the eucha- 
rist under both kinds, as is related by the three evan- 
gelists, and by Paul the apostle . 3 This institution, 
delivered to her by the apostles, the Catholic Church 
has always faithfully guarded, and still continues to 
guard, in whatever respects the substance of the insti- 

* “ The body of Christ,” that is, the Church of Christ. 4 The 
husband,’ saith Saint Paul, 4 is the head of his wife, as Christ is the 
head of the Church. He is the Saviour of his body. Ephesians v. 23. 

1 Romans viii. 9. 

2 August, tom. 9, exposit. in Evangel. Joan, tract. 27. 

3 Matthew xxvi. ; Mark xiv. ; Luke xxii. ; and 1 Cor. xi. — Vide 
Concil. Tridentin, sess. 21, doctrina de communione sub utraque 

specie, et parvulorum, c. I, 3. 


280 


white’s confutation 


tution. In like manner, the following commandment 
of Christ — ‘ Do this for a commemoration of me” — 
which commandment was given, with regard to the 
institution of the eucharist, by Christ to his apostles, 
and through them to the Church — has been carefully 
preserved even to the present day by the Church of 
Christ, which received her instruction from the apos- 
tles, according to their mind — and theirs is the mind 
of Christ . i 2 But that the Church ought, according to 
the commandment and ordinance of Christ, to minis- 
ter the sacrament of the eucharist under both kinds 
to all Christians alike, is the leaven of innovators, not 
the doctrine of the apostles : and therelore this inter- 
pretation of the ordinance and commandment is justly 
defined to be heretical by the Church in her general 
councils , 3 wherein she speaks with supreme authority, 
and w r here she is directed by the Spirit of truth, that 
abides with her for ever . 4 

But in order to explain the genuine meaning of 
the words of the institution, and of the commandment 
which accompanies it, it is to be observed — that the 
eucharist, of its own nature, includes within itself two 
things : the one whereby it is a sacrifice ; the other 
whereby it is a sacrament As the eucharist is a 
sacrifice, the nature of the institution requires that 
it be celebrated under both kinds : for, as the unbloody 
sacrifice, according to the nature of its institution, 
commemorates and represents the Woody sacrifice once 
offered on the altar of the cross ; so, in order perfectly 
and expressly to accomplish this end, among others, 
the successors of the apostles in the priesthood, the 
ministers of the unbloody sacrifice, to whom Christ 
said, * Do this for a commemoration of me ,’ 5 must, 
according to the institution of the Sacrifice, conse- 


i Luke xxii. 19. 2 ‘ But we have the mind of Christ,’ 1 Cor. ii. 16. 

3 Tom. 2, Conciliorum, Concil. Constant. Generale, scss. 13; et 

Concil. Trident, scss. 21, can. 1, 2. — Vide Concil. Basil, scss; 30. 

4 Joan. xiv. 16, 17. 5 Luke xxii. 19. 


OF CHURCH-0 F-ENGLANDISM. 281 

crate, offer, and receive the eucharist under both 
kinds. And the necessity of their so doing is fully 
demonstrated by the perpetual practice of the Church, 
with which the sense of the institution coincides : and 
is distinctly declared by the custom of the Church — 
which is the best interpreter of the commandment. 
But although in the sacrament of the eucharist, com- 
memoration is also made of the death of Christ ; yet, 
as no express representation of his death is required 
by the institution of the sacrament : l 2 consequently, the 
institution of the sacrament of the eucharist, does not, 
so far as regards its substance, require that it be 
ministered under both species. 

Moreover, as the entire Christ is contained under 
either species, whether we consider th6 nature of the 
eucharistic sacrament, or the fruit of it, we must 
confess, with the fathers of the Council of Trent, — 
“ That the whole and entire Christ, and the true 
sacrament, are taken under either kind singly ; and 
therefore that, as to the fruit, they who receive one 
kind only, are deprived of no grace necessary to sal- 
vation.”* Wherefore, as the administering of the 
sacrament, whether under both kinds, or whether 
under one kind only, regards the mode of administer* 
ing and receiving the eucharist, but not the substance 
of the sacrament administered and received ; and 
since it is certain, as the Synod of Trent declares — 
“ That there has always existed in the Church the 
power of decreeing or changing such things as, ac- 
cording to the variety of circumstances, times and 
places, it should judge most expedient for the advan- 
tage of those who receive them, or for the veneration 
of the sacraments themselves” 3 — therefore the Catho- 


1 1 Cor. xi. 25, 26. 

2 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 21, Doctrina de commun. sub utraque 
specie, c. 3. — Vide sess. 13, Decretum de sanctissimo Eucharisti© 
Sacramento, c. 3, et can. 3. 

3 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 21, c. 2. — Vide 1 Cor. iv. 1 ; et August, 
tom. 2, epist. 118, ad Januarium, c. 6. 

24 * 


282 


white’s confutation 


lie Church, using this its power in the administration 
of the eucharist, sometimes administered it under both 
kinds, sometimes under one, and sometimes again un- 
der the other; but always in accordance with reason, 
as will appear from the following testimonies. 

That the Church sometimes administered the eucha- 
rist under both kinds, it is now needless to prove, as 
you, my brethren, agree with Catholics on this point ; 
but the question at issue is, with respect to the admi- 
nistration of it under either kind only — and that it was 
so administered, it lieth upon us, who make the asser- 
tion, now to prove. This is proved, in the first place, 
by the custom which subsisted in the ancient Church 
of giving the eucharist to the faithful under the species 
of bread only, in order that they may carry it home 
with them, and there take it at a fitting time. Ter- 
tullian, in writing to his wife, mentions this custom. 
“• Shall not your husband know,” saith he, “ what you 
taste in secret before all other food ? And if he know it, 
he does not believe it to be, what it is called — bread.” 1 
This custom existed in the Roman Church in the time 
of St. Jerom also, as he himself relates : — “ I know,” 
says Jerom, “ that it is the custom at Rome, for the 
faithful invariably to receive the body of Christ. This 
custom I neither censure, nor approve : for each 
abounds in its own sense. But I am at issue with the 
religious views of those, who receive the communion 
on the very day after they have had conjugal inter- 
course ; and who remind us of the passage in Persius, 
where he represents persons cleansing their nightly 
impurities by the morning bath. Why do not such 
persons undertake to visit the tombs of the martyrs? 
Why have they any scruple to enter the churches ? 
Or is Christ one in the public temple, and another in 
their private houses ? That which is not lawful in 
the church, is not lawful at home.” 2 3 These are the 
words of Jerom. 


i Tertul. lib. 2, ad uxorem c. 5. — Vide Cyprian, de hac re serm. do 

lapeis, et inter opera ejus authorem de spectaculis, sub finem. 

3 Hieron. tom. 3, apolog. pro libris adversus Jovinian. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


283 


Secondly, it was customary in the early ages of the 
Catholic Church, to administer the eucharist as a 
viaticum to the sick, sometimes under one, sometimes 
under the other species. It was administered under 
the species of bread to Serapio, as Eusebius relates 
from the Epistle of Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, 
to Fabius . 1 Saint Ambrose also received the viaticum 
under the species of bread only , as his biographer, 
Paulinus, mentions towards the end of his life — “ The 
honoured priest of the Church of Versailles,” saith 
Paulinus, “ when settled to rest in an upper apartment 
of his house, thrice heard the voice of one calling on, 
and saying to him — ‘Arise, make haste : for thou art 
now about to depart.’ And stooping down, he gave 
to the holy man (Ambrose) the body of the Lord. 
Which when Ambrose received, he breathed forth his 
spirit, carrying with him the good viaticum — in order 
that his soul, refreshed by the heavenly food, may now 
enjoy the fellowship of the angels, whose life he lived 
on earth, and may rejoice in the company of Elias. 
For as Elias never dreaded to speak to kings or .po-* 
tentates, so neither did he, filled as he was with a holy 
and reverential fear of God .” 2 Such is the testimony 
of Paulinus, the biographer of St. Ambrose. On the 
other hand, it was given under the species of wine 
only, to such as, by reason of their infirmity, could 
not swallow it under that of bread. This is evident 
from the fourth Council of Carthage, the fathers of 
which define as follows : “ If it so happen that he who 
in sickness is desirous of penance, shall be overpower- 
ed by his disorder, and have become speechless or 
delirious at the time when the priest is called in ; let 
those who heard him express such desire, bear testi- 
mony of it, and thereupon let the sick man receive 
penance. And if he be thought likely to die forth- 


1 Euseb. Histor. Eccles. lib. 6, c. 36. 

2 Paulin, in vita Ambros. ad August, conscripta, prope finem, in 
tom. 1, operum Ambrosii. — Vide de hac re Bedam Hist. Ecclesiast. 
lib. 4, c. 14, et lib. 2, c. 5. 


284 


white’s confutation 


with, let him be reconciled by the imposition of hands, 
and let the eucharist be poured into his mouth .” 1 
Compare this canon with the eleventh canon of the 
eleventh Council of Toledo . 2 In the early ages, the 
Church gave communion to infants also, but under the 
species of wine only, as may be proved from St. 
Cyprian’s sermon on the fallen , 3 and as reason itself 
dictates : for infants cannot swallow any kind of solid 
food. 

Thirdly, in the primitive ages of Christianity, the 
Roman pontiffs and the clergy used, on Easter-eve, 
or the sixth day of passion week, solemnly to receive 
the holy communion under the species of bread only , 
as we read in the “ Sacramentary” of Pope Gregory 
the First . 4 Moreover, this custom is also related in 
the “ Roman Order,” which was published prior, at 
least, to the year eight hundred. And it is even com- 
manded therein, that all the blood be consumed on 
the anniversary of the Lord’s Supper (Holy Thurs- 
day), and that the body of the Lord only be preserved 
for the communion of the following day (Good Friday), 
on which day the sacrament is not consecrated . 5 But 
this custom is not, indeed, mentioned in the Roman 
Order, or in Pope Gregory’s Sacramentary, as one 
o {recent introduction; but as a custom handed down 
by the ancient fathers, and preserved by their suc- 
cessors. This same custom is also carefully observed 
at present throughout the whole Roman Catholic 
Church ; for upon this day, consecration does not take 
place, and the priest himself, in the public ministry, 
communicates under the one species only. 

Finally, though the Greek schismatics severely 
censure the custom which prevails in the Latin Church, 

i Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Concil. Carthag. 4, can. 76. 

5 Tom. 2, Conciliorum, Concil. Tolet. 11, can. 11. 

3 Cyprian, serm. de lapsis. 

4 Gregor, tom. 5, edit. Paris, lib. Sacrament, in officio Parascev. 

6 Bibliothec. Patrum, tom. 8, Ordo Roman, de officiis divinis in 
officio Parascev — Ibidem in officio ccenae Domini, seu feria 5. 


OF CIIURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 285 

of consecrating the eucharist in unleavened bread ; 
yet they raise no objection against her custom of 
giving communion to the faithful under one species 
only, which they certainly would do, if they thought 
that custom in any wise unlawful. As it is, therefore, 
evident from the foregoing arguments and authorities, 
that the doctrine of this article is contrary to the doc- 
trine and practice of the Catholic Church — it only 
remains for us to conclude this chapter with the words 
of St. Augustin : “ Whatsoever the Catholic Church 
practises throughout the world, it is indeed the ex- 
treme of insolence and madness to dispute but that it 
should be so .” 1 


CHAPTER XXX. 

The Thirty-First Article examined. 

In this article, entitled “ Of the Oblation of Christ 
finished upon the Cross,” we read as follows — “ The 
offering of Christ once made, is that perfect redemp- 
tion, propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of 
the whole world, both original and actual ; and there 
is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. 
Wherefore the sacrifice of masses, in the which it 
was commonly said, that the priest did offer Christ 
for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain 
or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous 
deceits.” 

EXAMINATION. 

As the Catholic Church, which received her in- 
struction from Christ, through his apostles, has inva- 
riably and at all times taught, that the sacrifice of the 
mass or eucharist was to be offered for the dead as 
well as for the living ; so she has hitherto unceasingly 
offered it for both, and continues the same practice at 


1 August, tom. 2, opist. 118, ad Januar. c. 5. 


286 


white’s confutation 


the present day. Whereas you, my brethren, by ob- 
stinately contradicting — we shall not say impiously 
carping at — this the Catholic doctrine and practice, 
have, even by this single article, stained the English 
Protestant Church with so black a mark of heresy, 
that you cannot possibly cleanse it, except by recan- 
tation and penance. However, in order that the 
truth of what we assert may be manifest, and that 
the lovers of truth may know what is to be embraced, 
and what to be avoided, in your doctrine of the bloody 
and unbloody sacrifice, we shall now briefly explain 
the doctrine of the Catholic Church on both these 
heads. 

In the first place, the Catholic doctrine teaches, 
that the virtue and efficacy of the bloody sacrifice, in 
which Christ once offered himself to his Father on 
the altar of the cross, sufficed for cancelling the sins, 
not only of the people of that age, when He hung a 
victim on the cross, but likewise of all mankind, born 
into the world from the beginning to the end of time. 
For the Scripture saith : ‘ God was in Christ recon- 
ciling the world to himself .’ 1 And again it saith : 
‘ Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh 
away the sin of the world.’ 2 — ‘And he is the propitia- 
tion for our sins ; and not for ours only, but also for 
those of the whole world .’ 3 Now the world comprises 
persons not of one period only, but of all ages. Of 
this oblation, which alone sufficed for the reconcilia- 
tion of the whole human race, the apostle Paul says : 
‘ For by one oblation he hath perfected for ever them 
that are sanctified .’ 4 And again : ‘ Because in him it 
hath well pleased the Father, that all fulness should 
dwell : and through him to reconcile all things unto 
himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, 
both as to the things that are on earth, and the things 
that are in heaven .’ 5 From this it is not to be infer- 


l 2 Cor. v. 19. 

4 Hebrews x. 14. 


2 John i. 29. 

5 Coloss. i. 19, 20. 


3 1 John ii. 2. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 28 If 

red, that there was not before, or is not now, any 
other sacrifice save that of Christ completed on the 
cross ; but that of all the other sacrifices, this is the 
only one which appeases God by its intrinsic merit, 
and which may therefore be called, by antonomasia, 
the peculiar and pre-eminent sacrifice. 

Secondly, the Catholic doctrine teaches, that, from 
the beginning of the world, when man lived under the 
law of nature, God impressed on the human mind, 
by means of divine inspiration, the rite of sacrificing ; 
in order that all men might be made partakers of 
this most efficacious oblation, which has been now 
offered and accepted as the full, sufficient, and entire 
price of the salvation of the world — and that they 
might transfer to themselves the saving fruits thereof. 
It also teaches, that, immediately on the law being 
given, God ordained different sacrifices, the use of 
which was not to reconcile man to God, and purchase 
his salvation; but to awaken constantly within the 
mind of man, by means of these external sacrifices, 
the recollection of the 'promised sacrifice ; to confirm 
his faith therein ; and to enable such as should believe 
and hope in its virtue, to apply to themselves the 
fruit of the future sacrifice, whereby God had pro- 
mised to redeem the world. Another object f r 
instituting those sacrifices was, that, as often as they 
should be celebrated, man might gratefully call to 
mind the manifold favours bestowed on him by the 
unceasing liberality of God, and also reflect on his 
own salvation, which was to be obtained through the 
promised Redeemer. 

As God, therefore, before the coming of Christ, gave 
to our fathers certain sacrifices, whereby they might 
be reminded of the great sacrifice of which they 
were in expectation — might have theii faith establish- 
ed therein — its fruit applied to their souls, through 
belief and prayer — and by the oblation of which they 
might be brought to a grateful recollection of God’s 
bountiful favours; so in like manner Christ instituted 


288 


white’s confutation 


and gave to his Church, under the appearances of 
bread and wine, the clean and salutary oblation of his 
body and blood, whereby we might constantly renew 
in our minds the recollection of his body that was 
suspended, and of his blood that was shed for us, upon 
the cross — and transfer to ourselves the fruit of this 
bloody oblation, by which ‘ He hath perfected for ever 
them that are sanctified.’ 1 For the way to celebrate 
the memory of the Lord, is by gratefully commemo- 
rating his death, and beseeching the Father, through 
the remembrance and merits of the passion of his 
Son, to become reconciled to us : and this supplica- 
tion we should offer, not only by vocal prayer ; but 
also by the real, that is, the mystical immolation of 
Christ under the appearances of bread and wine. 

The Catholic Church, therefore, recognizes and 
steadfastly maintains, in spite of the opposition of 
innovators, that there are two sacrifices of Christ, 
properly so called — equal indeed as to their substance, 
but widely different as to their object, and the manner 
of offering them. The one a bloody sacrifice offered 
on the cross; the other, that wherein JESUS him- 
self, a priest according to the order of Mdchisedech , 
offered, at supper, under the appearances of bread 
and wine, his body and blood to the Father ; thereby 
instituting a perpetual sacrifice of the New Law, 
which he committed to his apostles and their succes- 
sors in the priesthood, to be offered in commemora- 
tion of Him — even unto the end of time. As the 
manner of offering these sacrifices is different, so 
likewise is there a difference in their use. By his 
bloody sacrifice, Christ obtained the reconciliation of 
the entire world, propitiation for its sins, and the com- 
plete redemption of mankind ; but the unbloody sacri- 
fice he instituted, and committed to his Church, as a 
commemoration of the bloody sacrifice. By means 
of this, we present Christ to the Father after an im- 


1 Hebrews x. 14. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


289 


passible and unbloody manner: not for the purpose 
of purchasing anew the remission of sins and the re- 
demption of man ; but in order to apply to ourselves, 
by means of the unbloody sacrifice offered to the 
Father with faith and devotion, the remission and re- 
demption purchased for us on the cross — and we make 
this offering of the unbloody sacrifice, in compliance 
with the injunction of Christ, whereby he commanded 
us to do this for the commemoration of him. That 
is to say, as we have already explained it, to implore 
of the Father, that he would be pleased, through the 
commemoration and merits of the passion of his Son, 
to become reconciled to us — that he would grant us 
the remission of our sins — the salvation of our souls 
— the health of our bodies — and would secure to us 
the success of our undertakings. 

Finally, the Catholic doctrine teaches, that the 
sacrifice of the mass or eucharist is truly propitiatory} 
For the Lord, appeased by this sacrifice offered with 
faith and devotion, confers grace and the gift of pen- 
ance, forgives sins and offences, however enormous ; 
and so far is this sacrifice from being in any wise de- 
rogatory to him, that he, through the medium of it, 
most abundantly bestows the fruits of the bloody sa- 
crifice offered on the cross. Neither is the unbloody 
sacrifice offered solely for the atonement of the sins, 
punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the 
faithful whilst living ; but also for those departed in 
Christ who are not as yet fully purified — and it is so 
offered in strict conformity with the teaching of the 
apostles. For although those departed in Christ be 
sure of their salvation — by reason of the cardinal 
virtues, faith, hope, and charity, always abiding in 
them ; yet because they have departed this life, leav- 
ing some temporal punishment unsatisfied, or venial 
sin unatoned for, or perhaps both ; and as none are 
admissible, until wholly purified, to that heavenly 


Concil. Tridentin., sess. 22, Doctrina de Sacrificio Miss®, c. 2. 
25 


290 


white’s confutation ' 


Jerusalem, where nothing defiled can enter 1 — they 
still stand in need of the suffrages of their brethren 
here below, in order that (as St. Augustin saith) they 
may obtain of God “ a full remission, or at least a 
mitigation of the punishment adjudged them .” 2 And 
as the Catholic Church, which hath received her in- 
struction from the apostles, has always employed, 
among other suffrages, the sacrifice of the eucharist 
— so the nature of the communion which is acknow- 
ledged to subsist between her and all the saints, re- 
quires that no mode of suffrage be omitted whereby 
relief can possibly be afforded to the souls departed. 
For they, though released from their bodies, are con- 
nected with us by spiritual ties ; and as the different 
members of the human body are united by the soul, 
so they, connected by the bond of charity, adhere to 
us — and corporal death cannot divide or separate 
them from the mystical union of the body (that is, 
the Church) of Christ. From the doctrine of the 
Church, which we have just explained, with regard 
to the sacrifice of the mass, we shall now draw four 
conclusions ; and these, when established, will fully 
exhibit the falsehood (not to use any harsher term) 
of the article at present under consideration. The 
first conclusion which we shall deduce, is — that the 
eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice instituted by 
Christ. Second : The eucharist is a truly propitia- 
tory sacrifice . Third : The sacrifice of the eucharist 
is meetly and piously offered for the living and the 
dead. Fourth : This sacrifice is offered unto the 
glory of God, and for the advantage of the Church. 

The first conclusion is proved by the prophet 
Malachias. For he foresaw this saving sacrifice, and 
in these words foretold it with prophetic spirit : — ‘ I 
have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts : and 
I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the 


i Apocalypse xxi. 27. 

* August, tom, 3, Enchirid. ad Laurent, c. 110, 


OE CHURCH-OT-ENGLANDISM. 291 

rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is 
great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is 
sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean 
offering .’ 1 This sacrifice cannot be understood of 
mere spiritual sacrifices, which are peculiar to no 
law, but common to all times and to all people, and 
which have always been commingled with the sacri- 
fices of the ancients. But even the very order of the 
words is sufficient to convince us, that the prophet 
spoke of a sacrifice, which, upon the ancient sacri- 
fices being abolished, was to succeed in their place. 
Wherefore, these words are rightly understood to 
relate to the hallowed sacrifice of Christ, not that, 
indeed, by which he offered himself on the cross for 
the sins of mankind — for that was not consummated 
among the Gentiles , neither was it offered in every 
place , but in Judea alone; but to the sacrifice which 
the congregated Church of the Gentiles offers through- 
out the world, in order to commemorate the death of 
our Lord, and to transfuse into the souls of believers 
the virtue thereof. 

The Council of Trent has received this passage as 
relating to the sacrifice of the mass ; 2 * and it is so that 
the fathers of all ages have unanimously understood 
it. We shall now r adduce a few testimonies from the 
writings of the ancient fathers. St. Chrysostom, ex- 
plaining this passage of Scripture — ‘I have no pleasure 
in you,’ &c . 8 says : “ See how beautifully and how 
clearly the prophet interpreted the mystical supper, 
that is, the unbloody sacrifice. He indeed calls the 
sacred prayers, which are offered after the sacrifice , 
pure incense : for the perfume which delighteth God, 
is not that derived from earthly roots, but that which 
is exhaled from a pure heart. Let my prayer, there- 
fore, ascend as incense in thy sight. Do you see how 


1 Malachias i. 10, 11. 

2 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 22, Doctrina de Sacrificio Miss®, c. 1. 

* Malachias i. 10, 11. 


292 


white’s confutation 


it is allowed us to celebrate the angelic sacrifice in 
every place ? You see no bounds set, either to altars 
or to canticles. ‘ In every place incense is offered to 
my name/ It is therefore the pure Host — the first 
indeed — the mystic supper — the celestial sacrifice — 
deserving of supreme adoration ” l These are the 
words of the renowned Chrysostom. 

And before Chrysostom, St. Irenaeus, who flourished 
soon after the apostles , having first proved the sacri- 
fice of the mass from the words used by the Lord on 
instituting it, thus interprets the Scriptural passage 
above quoted : “ The Lord, on counselling his disci- 
ples to offer unto Cod the first-fruits of his creatures 
— not as if He stood in need of them, but in order 
that they (the disciples) may not be unprofitable or 
ungrateful — took bread, and gave thanks, saying: 
* THIS IS MY BODY.’ And the cup in like man- 
ner; he declared to be his BLOOD, and taught the 
doctrine of the new oblation of the New Testament, 
which the Church receiving from the apostles, offers 
unto God throughout the w 7 hole world. She offers 
unto Him who supplies us with food* * the first-fruits 
of his own gifts in the New Testament, which Mala- 
chias, one of the twelve prophets, foretold in these 
words : — ‘ I have no pleasure in you, saith the Om- 
nipotent Lord, and I will not accept sacrifice from 
your hands. For from the rising of the sun even 
unto the going down, my name is glorified among 
the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to 
my name, and a pure sacrifice : for my name is 
great among the Gentiles, saith the omnipotent Lord.’ 2 
The prophet manifestly shows by these words that 
the ancient People (the Jews) shall cease their offer- 
ings to God, and that in every place the pure sacri- 
fice of God shall be offered, and his name glorified 
among the Gentiles.” 3 And St. Justin Martyr, in his 


i Chrysost. tom. 1, homil. in Psal. 95. 2 Malachias i. 10, 11. 

* Iren, advemis ha?rcscs, lib 4, c. 32, in fine. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLAND1SM. 293 

dialogue with Tryphon, understands this passage in 
the same sense. “God,” saith he, “accepts sacrifice 
from none, except his own priests. Wherefore God, 
showing preference to the only sacrifice to be offered 
in his name — namely, the eucharist of bread and the 
chalice — instituted by Jesus Christ, and now cele- 
brated by Christians all over the earth, testifies that it 
is pleasing and acceptable to him. But the sacrifices 
offered by you and your priests, he rejects and an- 
grily censures in these words : ‘ I will not accept yourj 
sacrifices from your hands: for from the rising of the 
sun even to the going down, my name is glorified 
among the Gentiles : but ye profane it.’ ” 1 These are 
the words of Justin Martyr . 2 

Secondly, the Psalmist clearly teaches, that the 
eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice , when, speak- 
ing of Christ, he saith: ‘The Lord hath sworn, and 
he will not repent : Thou art a priest for ever accord- 
ing to the order of Melchisedech:^ From these words 
of Divine Scripture, the Council of Trent under- 
stands, that Christ offered to the Father his body and 
blood under the appearances of bread and wine , 4 as 
had been long before typified by the bread and wine 
offered to God by Melchisedech. And in this same 
sense the passage was understood by the apostle Paul,® 
and by all the ancient fathers, from whose writings 
we shall now produce a few testimonies. St. Cyprian 
says : — “ In the person of the priest Melchisedech we 
see a prefiguration of the sacrament of the sacrifice in- 
stituted by our Lord, according to the testimony of the 
Divine Scripture, which saith : ‘ Melchisedech, king 
of Salem, brought forth bread and wine : and he was 
the priest of the most high God, and he blessed Abra- 


1 Malachias i. 10. 11. 

2 Bibliothec. Patrum. Justinus Martyr, dialog, cum Tryphone 

Judffio adversus Jud®os. 3 Psalm cix. 4 — See Hebrews vii. 

4 Concil. Tridentin, sess. 22, Doctrina de Sacrificio Miss®, c. 1. 
s Hebrews vii. 17. 

25 * 


204 


white’s confutation 


ham/ 1 Now, that Melchisedech bore the figure of 
Christ, the Holy Ghost who proceeds from the Father, 
and the Son, declares in the Psalms, saying: ‘Before 
the day star I begat thee : Thou art a priest for ever 
according to the order of Melchisedech .’ 2 This order 
of priesthood, therefore, is the very one that origina- 
ted with, and has come down from that sacrifice : for 
Melchisedech was the priest of the most high God — 
he offered bread and wine — he blessed Abraham. 
And who is more a priest of the most high God, than 
our Lord Jesus Christ'? who offered sacrifice to 
God the Father, and offered the very same as Mel- 
chisedech did, that is to say, bread and wine — verily, 
his own body and blood.*” 3 And Augustin, when 
considering the 14th chapter of Genesis, which treats 
of Abraham and Melchisedech, in like manner says : 
“ Then indeed was Abraham blessed by Melchisedech, 
of whom many and great things are written in the 
Epistle that is addressed to the Hebrews ; which 
most people ascribe to the apostle Paul, but which 
others will not admit. For then appeared, for the 
first time, the sacrifice which is now offered unto God 
by the whole Christian world ; and, long after this 
sacrifice had been offered by Melchisedech, is com- 
pleted what the prophet foretold respecting Christ, 
who was to come in the flesh — ‘ Thou art a priest for 
ever according to the order of Melchisedech.’ 4 Not 
indeed according to the order of Aaron ; for this 
order was to be abolished, when the things prefigured 
by those types, should have become realized.” 5 Again, 
speaking of Christ, Augustin says : “ In presence 
therefore of the kingdom of his Father, he changed 
his countenance,* and dismissed him, and he went his 
way : for at that time sacrifice was offered according 

1 Genesis xiv. 18. 2 Psalm cix. 3, 4. 

8 Cypr. epist. 63, ad Caecilium de Sacramento Dominici Calicis. 

4 Psalm cix. 4. 5 August, tom. 5, “ De Civitate Dei,” lib. 16, c. 22. 

* Ps. 33, 1 ; and 1 Kings xxi. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


295 


to the order of Aaron, but He afterwards instituted 
the sacrifice of his own body and blood according to 
the order of Melchisedech. He therefore changed 
his countenance in the priesthood ; dismissed the Jew- 
ish nation, and came to the Gentiles.” 1 

Thirdly, the very words used on instituting the 
eucharist, prove it to be a true and proper sacrifice : 
for Christ, at his last supper, offered himself to God 
the Father, under the appearances of bread and wine, 
and ordered the self-same thing to be done by his 
apostles and their successors unto the consummation 
of the world. — This is evident from the very order of 
the words ; for our Divine Lord said, as Luke the 
Evangelist relates his words : ‘ This is my body, 
which is given fior you ’ — Ta-ro tb aZ>[ia [us, t 6 V7tkg v/xuv 
Stibixevov . 2 Or as the apostle Paul relates them : — 
‘ This is my body, which is broken far you ’ — T«to igi tb 
ou/xa [vs, to V7ti£ v[imv x^ufievov. 3 And in the canon of the 
mass, in the liturgies of Basil, Chrysostom, Clement 
of Home, and James the brother of our Lord, we 
read: ‘ This is my body which is broken for you , FOR 
THE REMISSION OF SINS.” 4 And of the cha, 
lice, likewise, Luke says : — ‘ This is the chalice , the 
New Testament in ?ny blood , which is shed for you,’ 

Tvto to riotr^iov, rj xanr} hiaQrptvi Iv tcp ai/xati [xis, to vrttg 

v[iZ>v txxwofjLtvov . 5 And to the words, 4 Which is shed 
for you/ Saint Matthew adds : * For the remission of 
sins,’ 6 as do also the forementioned liturgies. These 
words, therefore, which Christ uses in the present 
tense — “ is given” — “ is broken” — “ is shed” — do not 
signify that his body and blood were given or poured 
out to the apostles as a sacrament to be eaten and 


1 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psal. 33, concio secunda. 

2 Luke xxii. 19. 3 1 Cor. xi. 24. 

4 Basilii Missa inter opera ejus, prope finem. — Chrysostomi Missa, 
tom. 5, in fine. — Clemens. Constitut. Apost. lib. 8, c. 17. — Bibliothec. 

Patrum, tom. 1, Missa Jacobi fratris Domini. Vide etiam, in eodem 
tomo, Missam quoa dicitur Marci Evangelistse. 

5 Luke xxii. 20. 6 Matthew xxvi. 28. 


296 


white’s confutation 


drunk ; but that they are given and poured ou Wo God 
as a sacrifice for them and others. For Christ does 
not say : it is given, it is broken, or it is poured out to 
you ; but for you. Moreover, this food and drink 
were then given and poured out, only to the apostles 
who were at the time present, and yet the Lord says : 

* Which is shed for many for the remission of sins’ — 

to 7t* *%i rtoXkZjV txxw 6/xevov itt dq>s<3iv d/xa*tidjV.* T. hese 

latter words are also found in the forementioned 
liturgies. The sense, therefore, is: My body is given, 
and my blood is shed, for you and for many , as 
a propitiatory sacrifice, to the end that you may obtain 
the remission of sins : not indeed after a bloody man- 
ner, and under their proper species ; but in an un- 
bloody manner, and under the species of bread and 
wine, as hath been said above. Luke and Paul, in 
the passages already quoted, also subjoin: 1 This do 
for the commemoration of me ,’ 2 that is to say, — As I 
have made this offering, so do you and your succes- 
sors in like manner : for by these words Christ or- 
dained the apostles to be his priests, and decreed that 
they, and all the priests duly ordained by them in 
succession, should make this offering of his body and 
blood. 

That such is the sense of these words, the ancient 
fathers have unanimously taught. And in addition 
to the authorities already adduced, St. Chrysostom 
adds the weight of his testimony. “When, under the 
Old Testament,” says Chrysostom, “ men were more 
imperfect, God was pleased to accept that blood which, 
they used to offer to idols, in order that he may avert 
man from the worship of them, which also was a token 
of his inexpressible love. But now he has prepared 
a much more admirable and magnificent sacrifice ; 
and, changing the victim, has ordered that HIMSELF 
shall be offered in place of the brute animals.” 3 Again, 
Chrysostom saya; “ I mean to add something truly 

i Matthew xxvi, 28. 2 Luke xxii. 19; and 1 Cor. xi. 24. 

* Chrysost. tom. 4, comment, in 1 Cor. c. 10, homil. 24. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 297 

astounding: but be not amazed or troubled. Well, 
what is it? The sacred oblation — whether offered by 
Peter or Paul or any other priest, it matters not what 
be his merit — is the same which Christ himself gave 
to his disciples, and which the priests of the present 
day also produce. Our offering is nothing inferior to 
His. Why so ? Because it is not man that sanctifies 
it, but Christ himself, who, in the first instance also, 
was the consecrator. For as the words which 
Christ spoke are the very same as those which the 
priest now pronounces ; so in like manner, is the 
oblation also the same .” 1 Finally, in the liturgy of 
Chrysostom, the priest prays as follows : “ No man 
engaged in carnal desires and pleasures, is worthy to 
approach or minister unto thee, O king of glory. For 
to minister unto thee is a great and tremendous thing, 
and should be dreaded even by those endowed with 
more than celestial virtues. Yet, because of thy un- 
bounded and ineffable benignity, thou hast unhesitat- 
ingly and irrevocably become man, and our high 
priest. Thou, as the Lord of creation, hast instituted 
the rite of sacrifices, and committed to us the celebra- 
tion of this solemn and immaculate sacrifice.” And 
a little farther on, Chrysostom says: “ Therefore I 
beseech thee who alone art good and merciful, to look 
upon me a sinner, and thy ancient* servant, and purify 
my soul and heart from wicked thoughts ; and by the 
grace of thy priesthood, render me, who am endowed 
with the virtue of thy Holy Spirit, fit to assist at thy 
sacred altar, and consecrate thy holy and immaculate 
body and precious blood. For to thee do I approach 
with humble and submissive neck, beseeching thee not 
to turn thy face from me, nor cast me out from 
amongst thy children : but that thou wouldst suffer 

i Chrysost. tom. 4, comment, in 2 Tim. c. 1, homil. 2. 

* “ Thy ancient servant.” It appears to us, that in copying the 
original manuscript of Chrysostom, the word agzaiov has been acci- 
dentally substituted for ag%eiov, which means unprofitable , and 
which seems to be the more correct reading. 


298 


white’s confutation 


these gifts to be offered to thee by me a sinner, and 
thy unworthy servant. For it is Thou who offer est, 
and art offered, who acceptest and bestowest, O Christ 
our God.” 1 

In like manner, St. Ambrose, in his enarration on 
the 38th Psalm, says: “We have seen the Prince 
of priests coming to us ; we have seen and heard 
him offering his blood for us. Let us priests, as we 
possess the power, imitate Him and offer sacrifice 
for the people. Though we be weak in merit, yet 
we are honourable in sacrifice: for although Christ is 
not now seen to make the offering, yet He himself is 
offered on earth, as the body of Christ is the victim. 
Nay, it is manifest, that He, whose words sanctify 
the sacrifice that is offered, doth himself make the 
offering in us.” 2 And again, in his first prayer pre- 
paratory to the mass, we read these words: “For, O 
Lord Jesus Christ, with what contrition of heart, 
with what a fountain of tears, with what reverence 
and holy awe, what chastity of body and purity of 
mind, should we celebrate this divine and heavenly 
sacrifice — wherein thy flesh is verily and really re- 
ceived — wherein thy blood is verily and really drunk 
— where the highest things are joined with the lowest 
- — where the holy angels are present, and where after 
a wonderful and inexpressible manner, Thou art con- 
stituted both the priest and the sacrifice ! Who can 
worthily celebrate this sacrifice, unless thou, O omni- 
potent God, shalt render worthy, him who offers it?” 
And immediately after Basil says : “ For I, mindful, 
O Lord, of thy venerable passion, approach thy altar, 
though a sinner, in order that I may offer to thee the 
sacrfice w r hich thou hast instituted, and which thou 
hast commanded to be offered in order to commemo- 
rate our redemption. Accept it therefore, I beseech 
thee, O most high God, O most sweet Jesus Christ, 


l Chrysostomi Missa, tom. 5. 

* Ambros. tom. 4, cnarrat. in Psalm 38. 


OF CHUR CH-OF-ENGL ANDISM. 299 

for the benefit of thy holy Church, and in behalf of 
all thy people, whom thou hast purchased with thy 
precious blood,” &c.* In fine, the Council of Trent 
also defines this to be the sense of the foregoing 
words of Scripture, and justly punishes with ana- 
thema, those who teach that there is not offered unto 
God in the mass, a true and proper sacrifice . 1 2 

It would be easy for us to produce numerous other 
testimonies from the Sacred Scriptures, the liturgies, 
the general councils, and from the writings of other 
fathers, in confirmation of th e first conclusion ; but as 
those already quoted fully suffice, we shall for the 
sake of brevity, omit stating them at length, and 
merely refer to some of them in a note . 3 

We shall now proceed to consider the second con- 
clusion. It certainly is of faith, that the sacrifice of 
the mass is not only eucharistic and commemorative, 
but truly propitatory likewise : for, that this sacrifice 
should be offered for the remission of sins, the Catho- 
lic Church has constantly taught up to the present 
time, and for this purpose she has always offered it, 
just in the same manner she doth in our day. And 
this doctrine was taught her, through the apostles, by 
Christ, who, at the Last Supper, instituted the sacrifice 
of the eucharist for the remission of sins, and com- 
mitted it to his Church through the apostles, com- 
manding the same to be offered unto the end of time. 
Not that in the unbloody sacrifice a price is paid, or 
satisfaction offered for sin, as to the guilt of the of- 
fence and the eternal punishment due thereto — for in 
this sacrifice there is no passion, and the passion was 
that whereby God the Father was pleased to be satis- 


1 Ambros. tom. 4, Precatio prima praeparans ad Missam. 

2 Concil. Tridentin., sess. 22 , Doctrina de sacrificio Missce, c. 1, 
et can 1, 2 . 

8 See Acts xiii. 2 ; 1 Cor. v. 7, 8; and also 1 Cor. x. 18, 19. — Et 
vide liturgiam Gregor ii cum liturgiis superius citatis — Et tom. 1, 
Conciliorum, Concil. Nicen. 1. oecumen. can. 1 8. — Et in eodem torao, 
epist. Concilii Ephesini primi oecumen. ad Nestorjum. 


300 


white’s confutation 


fied ; but it is offered in order that the passion endured 
upon the cross may, through the sacrifice of the mass, 
be applied as the price and plenary satisfaction for 
our offences and the punishment due thereto. Whence 
St. Gregory the Great says : “ The sacrifice of the 
holy altar, offered with tears and a well disposed 
mind, contributes in a singular degree to procure our 
absolution : because He who of himself rose from the 
dead to die no more, still continues, by this oblation, 
to suffer for us in this his own mystery. For as often 
as we offer to him the sacrifice of his own passion, so 
often do we renew his passion for the attainment of 
our absolution.” 1 And St. Augustin, who flourished 
before Gregory the Great, says : “ When, therefore, 
the sacrifice of the altar, or alms-deeds, are offered 
for all deceased Christians ; they are acts of thanks- 
giving for the very good ; for the imperfect, acts of 
propitiation .” 2 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem calls the eucharist the vic- 
tim of propitiation. “ When,” says he, “ the great 
spiritual sacrifice is completed, and the unbloody 
worship over the victim of propitiation ended, then 
we supplicate God for the general peace of the Church, 
the tranquillity of the world, the happiness of kings,” 
&c. &c. And a little after he says: “We offer up 
the Christ who was slain for our sins, in order that 
He who is infinite in his goodness may be rendered 
propitious both to ourselves and to them.” 3 And in 
the liturgy of St. Basil we also read : “ Thou, O Lord, 
hast shown to us the great mystery of salvation; thou 
hast dignified us, thy miserable and unworthy ser- 
vants, to such a degree as to be made the ministers 
of thy holy altar : so now, by the virtue of thy Holy 
Spirit, duly qualify us for this ministry, that standing 
faithfully in the sight of thy glory, we may offer to 


1 Gregor, lib. 40, Homil. de diversis lectionibus Evangelii, homil. 37. 

2 August, tom. 3, Enchirid. ad Laurent, c. 110. 

8 Bibliothec. Patrum, tom. 4, Cyrill. cateches. mystagog. 5. 




OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


301 


thee the sacrifice of praise : for thou art he who work- 
eth all things in all.” And, lest it should be imagined, 
that the sacrifice was eucharistic only, St. Basil im- 
mediately subjoins: “Grant, O Lord, that our sacrifice 
be made acceptable in thy sight, and be received by 
thee in atonement for all our sins and the ignorance 
of thy people .” 1 It is our intention, when proving 
the following conclusion, to adduce additional testi- 
monies in confirmation of the one now under dis- 
cussion. We shall, for the present, close our argu- 
ments on this particular subject with the following 
observation — that the Council of Trent, after defining 
this to be the doctrine of the Catholic Church, punishes 
with anathema all who oppugn it . 2 

The proof of the third conclusion is also of faith. 
For the Catholic Church, which is THE PILLAR 
AND THE GROUND OF TRUTH , 3 has always 
taught, and now teaches, both by its doctrine and 
practice, that, according to the tradition of the apos- 
tles, the sacrifice of the mass is to be offered — not 
only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions and other 
necessities of the faithful in this life ; but also for 
those who have departed in Christ, and who are not 
as yet fully purifiqd . 4 

St. Augustin, in the ninth book of his Confessions, 
giving an account of the obsequies of his mother 
Monica, tells us that the sacrifice of the mass, which 
he calls the “sacrifice of our redemption ” was offered 
for her — and in the thirteenth chapter of the same 
book, he adds : “ For when the day of her dissolution 
was at hand, she occupied not her "thoughts about the 
sumptuous covering or embalming of her body ; 
neither did she desire a monument of a singular de- 
scription, or feel any anxiety to be deposited in her 
paternal sepulchre. Concerning such things as these, 

1 Basilii Missa, inter opera Basilii. 

2 Concil. Trident, sess. 22, Doctrina de sacrificio Miss®, c. 2, et 
can. 3. 

s 1 Timothy iii. 15. < Concil. Trident, loco jam proxirne citate. 

26 


302 


white’s confutation 


she gave us no commands ; but she was anxiously 
and ardently desirous — and of this alone was she de- 
sirous — that remembrance of her should be made at 
thy altar, where she had attended without one day’s 
intermission; knowing that from the altar is dispensed 
the holy victim, by which the hand- writing that stood 
against us hath been cancelled,” &c. The object, 
also, for which Monica sought that she should be re- 
membered at the altar, is perfectly evident from the 
prayer composed on the occasion by her son Augus- 
tin, which is partly as follows : “ O my praise and 
my life ! O thou the God of my heart ! setting aside 
for a while her good deeds, for which I joyfully ren- 
der thee thanks, I now entreat of thee forgiveness of 
the sins of my mother : hear me, I beseech thee, 
through Him who hath healed our wounds — who hath 
hung upon the tree, and who now sitting at thy right 
hand, maketh intercession with thee for us. I know 
that she passed her days in doing works of mercy, 
and forgave from her heart those that trespassed 
against her : do thou in like manner forgive her her 
trespasses, if she hath committed any during the 
many years that she lived after her baptism. Forgive 
them, O Lord ! forgive them I beseech thee — and 
enter not with her into judgment,” &c. And a little 
further on, Augustin again says : “ Inspire thou, O 
Lord my God ! inspire thy servants, my brethren — 
thy children, my masters, whom I serve with my 
voice, and my heart, and by my writings, that as 
many as shall read these words may, at thy altar, 
make remembrance of thy handmaid Monica and of 
Patricius, formerly her husband,” &C . 1 Such are the 
devout words and prayers of the great Augustin. 

And St. Chrysostom, in one of his homilies to the 
people of Antioch, says : — “ It was not unadvisedly 
ORDAINED BY THE APOSTLES, that comme- 
moration should be made of the dead, in celebrating 


i August, tom. 1, lib. 9, Confess, c. 12, 13. 


OF CHURCH-OF ENGLANDISM. 


303 


the tremendous mysteries. Because they knew that 
much gain and much advantage would arise to them 
therefrom : for when the entire people stand with 
uplifted hands, when the priest comes forth in the 
plenitude of his functions, and when the tremendous 
sacrifice is offered, how is it possible that our prayers 
can fail of propitiating God in their behalf?” 1 These 
are the words of Chrysostom. St. Cyril of Jerusalem 
also, when describing part of the canon of the mass, 
says : “ Then, w r e pray for the deceased holy fathers 
and bishops ; and, in short, for all who are departed 
this life in our communion — believing that by the 
supplication of this holy and tremendous sacrifice 
which is placed upon the altar, the souls for which it 
is offered receive the greatest relief.” And after ad- 
ducing examples, whereby to illustrate the custom of 
the Church, he immediately subjoins : “After the same 
manner, we also invoke God on the part of the de- 
ceased, although they were sinners; not indeed by 
weaving for him a crown, but by offering unto him 
Christ who was slain for our sins, that he, who is in- 
finite in his bounty, may be rendered propitious both 
to us and to them.” 2 

St. Ambrose, in like manner, fully demonstrates this 
our third conclusion, when, in his prayer before mass, 
he addresses the following supplication to God. — “ We 
also beseech thee, O holy Father, on behalf of the 
souls of the faithful departed , that this great sacra- 
ment of piety may be to them eternal salvation, per- 
petual rest, and never ending joy and felicity.” And 
a little further on, he says: “I humbly entreat thy 
clemency, O Lord, that the fulness of thy Divinity 
may descend on this bread and on this chalice. Grant 
likewise, O Lord, that, as the invisible form, and 
incomprehensible majesty of thy Holy Spirit, in times 
past, descended on the victims of the fathers — so may 


1 Chrysost. tom. 5, Homil. 69, ad populum Antiochen. 

2 Bibliothec. Patrum, tom. 4, Cyrill. catechesi mystagog. 5. 


304 white’s confutation 

it now descend on our oblations and convert them 
into thy body and blood. Grant also .that I thy un- 
worthy priest be taught so to handle this so great 
mystery, as that thou wouldst in thy Divine mercy 
deign to accept the sacrifice from my hands, for the 
salvation of all, both living and dead .” 1 So far the 
testimony of Ambrose. And in the liturgy of St. Basil, 
in the canon of the mass for the dead, the priest thus 
commends them to God: “We likewise implore of 
thee to remember all those who sleep in hope of the 
resurrection of eternal life, and to refresh them with 
the light of thy countenance .” 2 

Moreover, in the “ Sacramentary” of Pope Gregory 
the First, a work formerly in high repute among the 
English, the priest, in the canon of the mass for the 
dead, prays as follows : “ Be mindful, O Lord, of thy 
servants, both men and women, who are gone before 
us with the sign of faith, and now rest in the sleep of 
peace. Grant to them, O Lord, and to all who rest 
in Christ, a place of refreshment, light and peace ; w r e 
beseech thee, through the same Jesus Christ, our Lord. 
Amen.” And in the same book, in the mass for such 
of the deceased as are deprived of the use of speech 
before death, and with whom the priest does not arrive 
in time ; but who, by intelligible signs, as attested by 
the persons present on the occasion, have manifested 
the desire, and sought to obtain penance from a priest: 
in the oblation of the sacrifice for a person w T ho died 
under these circumstances, the priest prays as follows: 
“We beseech thee, O Lord, that the oblation of the 
present sacrifice offered for the soul of thy servant, 
may satisfy Thee, and may he obtain the forgiveness 
of his sins, which he humbly craved : and w 7 e also 
beseech thee, that that w 7 hich the failure of his speech 
prevented him from asking, he may now fully receive 
in compensation for the penance w hich he anxiously 


1 Ambros. tom. 4, Precatio prima prreparans ad Missam. 

2 Basilii Missa, inter ejus opera. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


305 


longed for — through our Lord Jesus Christ thy Son, 
who liveth and reigneth for ever and ever. Amen .” 1 
But what occasion is there for our multiplying testi- 
monies on this subject? since it is clear that, one 
thousand two hundred years ago,* Aerius was num- 
bered among the hst of heretics, for teaching that the 
sacrifice of the mass was not to he offered for the dead. 
This fact is testified by Augustin, Epiphanius, and 
other Catholic writers of the highest authority, in 
their several works on heresies . 2 And hence the 
Council of Trent deservedly punishes with anathema, 
those who again revive this heresy which had been 
long condemned . 3 

The three foregoing conclusions, which we have 
now proved, fully manifest and establish the truth of 
our fourth and last conclusion. For how is it possi- 
ble for man to contribute in a higher degree to the 
glory of God, than he does by unceasingly offering, 
with true faith and devotion, to the Father of mercies, 
who gave his only begotten Son to us sinners as the 
price of our redemption, that same Son as a comme- 
morative and eucharistic sacrifice — and to do this in 
conformity with, and obedience to, His own institu- 
tion and commandment? Or what, we ask, can be 
of greater advantage to the Church, than constantly 
to apply, by the religious oblation of the unbloody, the 
virtues and merits of the bloody, sacrifice for the be- 
nefit of those on whose behalf the oblation of the 
cross has been offered ? 


1 Gregor, tom. 5, lib. Sacrament. Missa Rom. — Vide Gregor, ibidem 
in Missa anniversaria unius defuncti, et in Missa unius defuncti. 

* “ One thousand two hundred years ago.” It is now one thou- 
sand three hundred and eighty years ago ; for the original of this 
work was published by our learned and pious author in the year of 
our Lord 1661. 

2 August, tom. 6, lib. de haeres. ad Quodvultdeum, haeres. 53. — 
Epiphan. in anacephalaeosi, seu summa totius operis Panarii — Et 
Joan. Damascen., lib. de haeres. in haeres. Aerii. 

8 Concilium Trident, sess. 22, Doctrina de Sacrificio Missae, can. 3. 

26 * 


306 


white’s confutation 


CHAPTER XXXI. 

The Thirty-Second Article examined. 

Article the thirty-second, entitled “Of the Mar- 
riage of Priests,” proceeds thus : — Bishops, Priests, 
and Deacons, are not commanded by God’s law, 
either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain 
from marriage : Therefore it is lawful for them, as 
for all other Christian men, to marry at their own 
discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better 
to godliness.” 

EXAMINATION. 

It is not a doctrine of the Catholic Church, that 
bishops, priests, and deacons, are bound by the Divine 
Law to make the vow of celibacy, or to abstain from 
marriage, as is proved by the obligation being dis- 
pensed with in favour of the Greek priests ; yet the 
Catholic Church condemns, and, as will appear from 
what follows, deservedly condemns, as being absurd, 
and repugnant to sound doctrine, the inferences 
which you, my Protestant brethren, deduce in the 
preceding article. 

For, in the first place, God requires that obedience 
shall be paid, not only to his own laws, but likewise 
to the laws of his Church. 1 And the Catholic Church 
of Christ hath, from the days of the apostles , always 
required by her laws, as she requires at the present 
time, that those to be initiated in holy orders shall, if 
single, continue thenceforth to lead a single life : and 
that — in case any of the candidates be married men, 
they shall not be admitted to holy orders, until they 
first promise to live as though they had never been 
married. But the doctrine which you, my brethren, 
teach in this article, namely, that it is lawful for 
bishops, priests, and deacons to marry at their plea- 
sure, and consequently, that it is lawful for them to 


i Proverbs i. 8 ; vi. 20 ; and Matthew xviii. 17. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 307 

despise, at their pleasure, the laws of the Church , 
amounts to a downright absurdity. Secondly, it 
teaches that monks — men who are bound by the so- 
lemn vow of chastity — can, also, lawfully marry at 
their pleasure : for it is obvious, both from the doc- 
trine and practice of the established church, that 
monks, too, are comprehended under these words of 
the article — “as for all other Christian men.” Such a 
doctrine is, indeed, both impious and sacrilegious. 

Moreover, the Catholic Church judges that conti- 
nence annexed to holy orders, is highly conducive to 
godliness, and calculated to preserve the honour and 
dignity of the sacred office ; but the bishops, priests, 
and deacons of the Protestant church, abandoning 
themselves to conjugal gratifications, from the very 
infancy of its establishment, have, as an excuse for 
their own incontinence, always united in teaching — 
that the marriage of priests is conducive to godliness! 
But, whether we consider the ecclesiastical canons, 
or weigh the consciousness of a solemn vow, or whe- 
ther, in fine, we take into account how well adapted 
the life of continence is for those who discharge the 
sacerdotal duties — the doctrine of this article must, 
in either case, be rejected as absurd. 

We shall commence by citing, in the first place, 
the canons of the Church, which require continence 
on the part of priests and deacons, and which, by so 
requiring, convey a sharp rebuke against the irregu- 
larity and wickedness of this article. “ Those men,” 
saith St. Epiphanius, “ who upon the death of their 
wives contract marriage a second time, have never, 
since the coming of Christ, been allowed to preach 
the Holy Gospel of God — because of the superior 
honour and dignity of the priesthood. And doubtless, 
the Holy Church of God, in observing this custom, is 
actuated by pure and upright motives. Moreover, 
she does not receive the husband of one wife still co- 
habiting with her; but the man who has remained 
continent from one wife, or who has lived in widow- 


308 


white’s confutation 


hood, him the Church admits to the order of sub- 
deacon, deacon, priest, or bishop — and particularly 
where the ecclesiastical canons are sound and uncor- 
rupted.” 1 And again, in the end of his “ Panarium,” 
Epiphanius thus relates — “ The priesthood is for the 
most part composed of virgins ; and if not of virgins, 
at least of such as lead a single life. But if they who 
lead a single life, be not sufficiently numerous to sup- 
ply the ministry, then are admitted such as remain 
continent from their wives, or they who continue 
widowers after one marriage. For he that has mar- 
ried a second time, cannot be admitted to the priest- 
hood ; although he who shall have remained a conti- 
nent widower from the beginning, may hold the office 
of bishop, priest, deacon, and subdeacon.” 2 

The testimony of St. Jerom, writing against the 
heretic Vigilantius, is equally clear on this head. 
“ What,” asks Jerom, “ will the churches of the East 
do? What those of Egypt and of the apostolic see, 
which receive for their clergy either virgins, or con- 
tinent men — or such persons as, in case they had 
wives, now cease to be husbands ?” 3 And elsewhere, 
Jerom says : “ The apostles were either virgins, or 
men who after marriage became continent ; and the 
persons now chosen for bishops, priests, and deacons, 
are either virgins or widowers, or at least men who 
remain chaste ever after they have been admitted to 
the priesthood.” 4 So far St. Jerom on the celibacy 
of the clergy. And Pope Leo the First, in like man- 
ner, says : “ For although you decree that all who are 
not of the clerical order, are at liberty to marry, and 
rear families; yet for the purpose of showing the 
purity of perfect continence — carnal conversation is 

1 Epiphanius contra haeres. 59, contra Catliaros, seu Puritanos. 

2 Epiphanius in fine Panarii. Compendiaria vera doctrina de fide 
Catholicae et Apostolicee Ecclesiae. 

3 Iiieron. tom. 3, adversus Vigilant., paulo post princip. 

4 Hieron. tom. 3, Apologia pro libris adversus Jovinian. ad Pam- 
machium, in fine. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDIBM. 309 

not allowed even to subdeacons : in order that they 
who have wives, be even as they who have not ; and 
that they who have not, continue to remain single. 
But if, in this order, which is the fourth from the 
head, it is meet to be watchful : how much more care 
must be taken that, in the first, or second, or third 
order, the man who is discovered not to have as yet 
restrained himself from uxorious voluptuousness, be 
not deemed fit, either for the levitical ministry, the 
sacerdotal honour, or the episcopal dignity .” 1 The 
second Council of Carthage, also, hath decreed as fol- 
lows on this subject — “ Bishop Aurelius said : when 
the regulating of continence and chastity was treated 
of in the last council, these three degrees were, be- 
cause of their being conferred by consecration, ranked 
together in a specific decision respecting chastity. 
The council decreed, I say, that bishops, priests, and 
deacons — as is befitting the holy prelates and priests 
of God — and also the levites, or they who assist at 
the administration of the Divine sacraments — should 
be strictly continent ; in order that they may freely 
obtain their requests of God, and that an usage 
taught by the apostles , and preserved by antiquity, 
should be faithfully guarded by us also. — The assem- 
bled bishops then said : We all decree, that bishops, 
priests, and deacons, or such as handle the sacra- 
ments, being the guardians of chastity, shall themselves 
abstain even from wives. Then the whole council 
exclaimed : We decree, that chastity shall be strictly 
preserved by all who serve at the altar .” 2 And this 
canon afterwards received the express sanction and 
confirmation of the Council of Africa, in these words : 
“ Moreover, when the incontinence of certain of the 
clergy, though with their own wives, came under con- 
sideration — it (namely, the Council of Carthage) de- 
creed, that bishops, priests, and deacons, should, ac- 


1 Leo ad Anastas. Thessaloniccns. episcopum, epist. 84, c. 4. 

2 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Concil, Carthag. 2, c. 2. 


310 


white’s confutation 


cording to the former statutes, abstain even from 
wives. And unless they comply with this decree, let 
them be removed from the ecclesiastical office .” 1 
These are the words of the fathers of the Council of 
Africa. And one thousand three hundred years ago, 
the fathers of the Council of Neocaesarea passed the 
following decree : “ If a priest marry , LET HIM BE 
DEPOSED FROM HIS ORDER .” 2 In the twenty- 
fifth, or, according to others, in the twenty-seventh 
canon of those called “ the canons of the apostles,” 
we read the following decree : “ Of the unmarried 
who have reached the clerical order, we decree, that 
the lectors and cantors only (if they choose it) may 
marry .” 3 

St. Jerom, writing against the heretic Jovinianus, 
observes — and Eusebius of Caesarea, who flourished 
prior to Jerom, has also observed the same 4 * — that 
such of the apostles as were married before their calling, 
remained continent from their wives after they received 
the apostleship. “ And according to this regulation,” 
says St. Jerom, “ Peter and the other apostles indeed 
(that I may for the present concede more than is re- 
quired) had wives ; but they had taken them at a time 
when they knew not the Gospel. Upon being after- 
wards elevated to the apostleship, they relinquished 
the conjugal privileges. For when Peter, in the person 
of all the apostles, saith to the Lord — ‘ Behold we 
have left all things, and have followed thee’ — the Lord 
answered him : * Amen, I say unto you. that every one 
that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, 
for my name’s sake : shall receive an hundred-fold, 
and shall possess life everlasting.’ J?* Such is the tes- 
timony of Jerom, respecting celibacy . 6 Nay, although 


1 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Concil. Aphrican. can. 37. 

2 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Cencil. Neocaes. can. 1. 

8 Tom. 1. Conciliorum, Canones Apost. can. 25 alias 27. 

4 Euseb. Caesar, de demonstrat. evangelica, lib. 3, c. 7. 

8 Matthew xix. 27, 29. 

® Hieron. tom. 3, lib. 1 , adversus Jovinianum. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


311 


the fathers assembled in Trullo dispensed with the 
obligation of continence from wives, in all cases 
where priests had been married before receiving the 
sacerdotal order — or rather, though these fathers, 
actuated by hatred towards the Roman Church, de- 
clared this license to have formerly been, and then to 
be, allowed all priests' so circumstanced ; yet they 
would by no means extend this same dispensation to 
such of the bishops as had been married before their 
elevation to the episcopacy . 1 2 3 It appears to us, that 
the great reason why this distinction was made by 
them, was — because they knew that the bishops are 
the successors of the apostles , who, by the example 
afforded in their own persons, have taught that con- 
tinence, in such case, is to be observed. Add to this, 
that in the primitive ages of Christianity, it was so 
disgraceful a thing for a bishop to have conversation 
with his wife, that even the heretic Jovinianus was 
ashamed to say this license was allowable in himself. 
And that Jovinianus was ashamed to defend such con- 
duct, is evident from the following passage of St.Jerom, 
extracted from his writings against that heretic — 
“You confess at least,” saith Jerom to Jovinianus, 
“ that he cannot be a bishop, who begets children 
during his episcopacy. Or, in other words, that if he 
be detected, he shall not be regarded as a man, but 
condemned as an adulterer .” 3 

Moreover, as the fathers of the Council of Sens 
observe, although the Eastern Church was unwilling 
to have its clergy so severely restrained, as that they 
should not be allowed to enjoy the marriages con- 
tracted before they had become priests ; yet, such is 
the sublime nature and transcendent excellence of the 
priesthood of Christ, that not one solitary instance 

1 Tom. 5, Conciliorum, edit. Paris. Decreta Patrum qui Constanti- 
nopoli convenerunt in Trullo, Regii Palatii loco, sub Justiano Impe- 
ratore, can. 13. 

2 Ibidem can. 12 et can. 48. 

sHieron. tom. 3, lib. 1, adversus Jovinianum. 


312 


white’s confutation 


can be produced of marriage having ever been law- 
fully introduced into it. And therefore the fathers of 
the Council of Sens, before referred to, enacted thus — 
“Whosoever shall, contrary to the decrees of the sacred 
councils and fathers, teach that priests, deacons, or 
subdeacons, are not bound by the law of celibacy, or 
shall allow them liberty to marry: let every attempt 
of such person at evasion be rejected, and he himself 
numbered among the heretics .” 1 * And the general 
Council of Trent, in the ninth canon of its twenty- 
fourth session, afterwards decreed : “ If any one shall 
say, that the clergy established in sacred orders, or 
the regulars, who have made the solemn profession 
of chastity, can contract marriage, and that this mar- 
riage, when contracted, is valid, notwithstanding the 
ecclesiastical law, or the vow of chastity ; and that 
to oppose this, is to condemn marriage ; and that all 
can contract marriage, who do not feel that they pos- 
sess the gift of chastity, though they have made the 
vow to preserve it — let him be anathema : for God 
does not deny this gift to those who ask for it in the 
proper manner, or suffer us to be tempted above our 
strength .” 1 

But the second conclusion contained in this, the 
thirty-second article — namely, that it is lawful for 
monks, men bound by the solemn vow of chastity, to 
take wives, contrary to the canon of the Council of 
Trent now quoted, is a thing horrible to be said. For 
since it is impious and sacrilegious to commit such a 
crime, how much more so is it to inculcate the doc- 
trine that such crimes can be perpetrated, at the plea- 
sure of each individual? For this is nothing else but 
trampling under foot the 'Divine Law, respecting the 
payment of vows to God, and proclaiming open war 
against Heaven . 3 

i Tom. 3, Conciliorum, Concil. Provinciate Senonense, Decreto 8, 
de cselibatu Sacerdotum. 

a Concil. Trident, sess. 24, de Sacramento Matrimonii, can. 9. 

s Deuteronomy xxiii. 21 ; Psalm lxxv. 12; and Eccles. v. 3, 4. 


OF CHURCH-OF ENGLANDISM. 


313 


St. Chrysostom, writing to the monk Theodorus, 
says : 4 Marriage is honourable, and the bed undefiled. 
For fornicators and adulterers God will judge .’ 1 But 
to retain the privilege of marriage, is not now lawful 
for you : for, having once joined the society of angels, 
to abandon it, and become fettered with a wife, is to 
incur the crime of adultery. Though you may fre- 
quently call this state marriage ; yet I affirm, that it 
is worse than adultery — by as much as an angel is 
greater and better than a mortal. On no account, 
then, allow yourself to be persuaded by any person, 
saying : The Lord hath given no commandment not 
to take a wife. I confess I am not ignorant, that the 
Lord forbad adultery, and did not forbid marriage ; 
but he will enter the crime of adultery against thee, 
if ever — which God forbid — thou settest thy thoughts 
on marriage .” 2 These are the clear and forcible 
words of Chrysostom. And in like manner, St. Jerom, 
in his first book against the heretic Jovinianus, ex- 
plaining these words of the apostle: ‘And if a virgin 
marry, she hath not sinned ,’ 3 says : “ Not that virgin 
who has once dedicated herself to the worship of 
God : for if one of these marry, ‘ she shall have dam- 
nation ;, BECAUSE SHE HATH MADE VOID 
HER FIRST FAITH . 4 But if the foregoing prohi- 
bition be objected against widows , how much more 
forcibly will it apply to virgins: since even that which 
was once lawful for them, is not lawful now? For 
virgins who marry after consecration, are to be ac- 
counted guilty rather of incest, than of adultery .” 5 
St. Augustin also, in his enarration on the eighty-third 
Psalm, writing on the payment of vows to God, says : 
“ The other, by the bounty of God, vowed something 
greater: he resolved not to partake of marriage. 
And he who would not have been condemned for 


1 Hebrews xiii. 4. 

2 Clirysost. tom. 5, ad Theodorum Monachum, cpist. 6. 

8 1 Cor. vii. 2?. 4 1 Timothy v. 12. 

sHieron. tom. 3, lib. 1, advcrsus Jovinianum. 

27 


314 


white’s confutation 


marrying, shall, if he marry after making the vow to 
God , be condemned — although he who made no vow 
may marry with impunity. The latter shall not be 
condemned ; the former is instantly condemned. 
Why is there this distinction, unless because of the 
difference in their past states? For the one was al- 
ready advanced in evangelical perfection ; the other 
had not as yet arrived at that state. So likewise the 
virgin who would not, by marrying, have committed 
sin : if she marry after becoming a nun, shall be ac- 
counted an adultress of Christ .” 1 So far Augustin. 

The fathers of the Council of Tribur command, 
that such persons as are united by nefarious marriages 
of this description shall be separated : For thus do 
they decree in their twenty-third canon : “■ In the 
Epistle of Pope Syricius, chapter the sixth, we read 
as follows : — ‘ Should nuns consecrated to God, re- 
nouncing their former resolution of sanctity, secretly 
mix themselves in sacrilegious contagion, or publicly 
and without restraint engender children of illicit em- 
braces ; it is decreed, that those immodest and de- 
testable persons shall be expelled the society of the 
monasteries, and the congregations of the churches — 
in order that being shut up in houses of correction, 
they may bewail with incessant tears so foul and 
heinous a crime.’ 2 — Wherefore, we, in this holy synod 
assembled, do, by the word of the Lord, and by 
canonical authority, command, that such persons be 
wholly separated, and bound by an oath, no longer to 
live together under one roof, or address each other in 
familiar discourse, except in the church or in public ; 
and likewise, that they hold no communion, wherefrom 
the suspicion of a criminal desire, or the scandal of a 
lustful act, might reasonably arise .” 3 

1 August, tom. 8, enarrat. in Psalm 83. — Vide eliam enarrat. in 
Psal. 75. 

2 Tom. 1, Coneiliorum, epist. 1, Syricii ad Himerium, episcopum 
Tarraconens. c. 6. Vide Gregor, lib. 1, epist. ex Registro. epist, 40, 
ad Anathemium subdiaconum. 

s Tom. 2, Coneiliorum, Concil. Tribur A, D. 895, can. 23. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDI8M. 315 

Nay, when Saint Paul affirms that widows who 
violate the faith of continence given them by Christ, 
4 hate damnation ,’ the apostle does not say they have 
damnation, because they marry , but because 4 they 
will marry.’* For such unions are not to be called 
marriages, but lustful and sacrilegious concubinages, 
as is decreed by the fourth General Council of Car- 
thage, in addition to the testimonies already adduced. 
The fathers of that council, in their last canon, declare 
and decree in these words : “ As the reward of chas- 
tity is liberal, so must it be guarded by a more strict 
observance and precept. So that such women as 
have been left widows by their husbands, whether 
ever so young, or whether of mature age, provided 
they have devoted themselves to the Lord — laid aside 
the laical dress — and, under the testimony of a bishop 
and the Church, appeared in the religious habit — but 
who have afterwards married — shall, according to the 
apostle, have 4 damnation because they dared to 
make void the faith of chastity, which they vowed to 
the Lord. Let such persons, therefore, be excluded 
from the communion of Christians, and also let them 
not be made partakers in the banquet with Christians. 
For if adulterous wives be, on account of their guilt, 
obnoxious to their husbands ; how much more severe- 
ly shall the widows, who have forsaken their devout 
profession, be branded with the crime of adultery, in 
case they form a second marriage, and defile by lewd 
indulgence that life of devotion, which, when not re- 
quired, they spontaneously offered unto God t” * 1 

The Council of Chalcedon, also, the fourth oecume- 
nical one, passed a grave decree against those who 
violate a solemn vow. For we read in its fifteenth 
canon, as follows : “ A deaconess should not be or- 


*“ Because they will marry.” That is, because they have the 
desire to marry. — In the Greek ya/xnv 0itov6n. 1 Timothy v. 11, 12. 

i Tom. 1, Conciliorum, ConciL Carthag. 4, Generale in Aphrica, 
Can. 104. 


316 


WHITE S CONFUTATION 


dained before her fortieth year, and then after a dili- 
gent trial. But if she shall have received consecration, 
and fulfilled the duties of her ministry for ever so long 
a period, and afterwards, abusing the grace of God, 
give herself up to marriage — let her be anathema, to- 
gether with him who married her.” And in the six- 
teenth canon of the same council, we read — “ If a 
virgin dedicate herself to God, and a monk likewise, 
it is not lawful that they be united in marriage ; but 
if they be found so to do, let them be anathema. 
However, we decree that a more merciful treatment 
may be adopted towards them, provided the bishop 
of their district shall think proper .” 1 But now, that 
we may see how admirably the state of continence is 
adapted for those who discharge the functions of a 
holy order, natural reason dictates to every man, that 
he should abstain from such things and actions, as 
are incompatible with his office, or which must una- 
voidably impede him in the discharge of its duties, 
and subtract from the dignity of the office itself. 
Since, therefore, the mutual obligations contracted 
by the married, present to persons of the monastic 
and clerical state a great impediment in the discharge 
of their duties, and particularly to priests, w hom this 
article chiefly applies to : and since these obligations 
detract in no inconsiderable degree from the respect 
due to the sacred orders themselves, we must unavoid- 
ably come to the conclusion — that it is expedient for 
such persons wholly to abstain from marriage. 

For, in the first place, the chief function of a priest 
— which consists in his offering sacrifice — requires 
great purity both of mind and body, as is attested by 
Chrysostom, Jerom, and other doctors of the Catholic 
Church . 2 For if the priest whose duty it w r as to offer 
sacrifice to God, under the Old Testament, withdrew 


1 Tom. 1, Conciliorum, Concil. Chalced. CEcumcn. 4, act. 15, can. 
15, 16. 

2 Chrysost. tom. 5, lib. 6, de Saccrdotio. — Et Hieron. tom. 3, lib. 
1, advcrsus Jovinianum. — Et tom. 9, comment, in Tit. c. 1. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


317 


himself from his wife and h is home for the term du- 
ring which he officiated ; 1 and if none could eat of the 
loaves of proposition — save such as were clean from 
woman: 2 how much more so is this cleanliness required 
on the part of those whose duty it is to sacrifice, in 
an unbloody manner, the true, immaculate Lamb; 
and also on the part of those, the nature of whose of- 
fice requires them to assist the priest in offering the 
sacrifice, and to eat of that bread which descended 
from heaven — namely, the very flesh of the Son of 
God, whereof the ancient sacrifices, and the loaves of 
proposition, were but the figures and shadows. 

Moreover, if married people, as the apostle Paul 
teaches, should be continent and abstain ‘ for a time,’ 3 
that they may the better give themselves to fasting, 
prayer, and, consequently, to other pious offices — for : 
* He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things 
that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. 
But he that is with a wife is solicitous for the things 
of the world , how he may please his wife : and he is 
divided’ 4 — surely then, it is expedient that priests, 
who, in accordance with the nature of their office, 
have voluntarily and entirely consecrated themselves 
to God ; and who, therefore, are bound to spend their 
whole lives in promoting the salvation of the people, 
by prayer, sacrifice, and the other duties of their sa- 
cred calling : it is expedient, we repeat — that priests 
should entirely abstain from wives. For uxorious 
embraces weigh down the mind, and lower it to the 
earth ; the love of children renders the mind avari- 
cious and fills it with worldly solicitude — things that 
are wholly unbecoming and unworthy the priests of 
the Lord. Add to these considerations, that unless 
the people see something pre-eminently singular in 
the sacerdotal state — such as abstinence from carnal 
pleasures, which is so in the highest degree — they 


i Luke i. 23, 24. 1 Paralipomenon xxiv. 19. 

a 1 Kings xxi. 4, 5, 6. 8 1 Cor vii. 5. < 1 Cor. vii. 32, 33. 

27 * 


318 


white’s confutation 


will hardly pay to priests that honour which is deserv* 
edly due to so divine an order. 

Finally, if priests do not themselves practise con- 
tinence, they could but with an ill grace exhort others 
to follow that angelic life, which is the highest orna- 
ment of the Catholic Church . 1 Christ teaches that 
there are ennuchs, who have made themselves eu- 
nuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake ; 2 and in 
the same Gospel, He also exhorts others to choose 
that heavenly state of life. And “eunuchs” of this 
description — persons who follow the counsel of Christ, 
and are strengthened and supported by His grace — 
have at all times been found in the Catholic Church. 
Nay, at the present day, a vast multitude of English 
virgins, of high extraction (to say nothing of the 
men), are to be found in the territories of Catholic 
princes, passing their days in holiness, and living unto 
the Lord in body and spirit. And in proportion as 
these holy virgins proclaim the sanctity of the Catho- 
lic Church, and tend to adorn it; in the same degree 
do they rebuke, as impure, your synagogue, where 
virginal glory is wholly extinguished. 


CHAPTER XXXII. 

The Thirty-Fourth Article examined. 

Article the thirty-fourth, entitled “Of the Tradi- 
tions of the Church,” thus teaches: “It is not neces- 
sary that traditions and ceremonies be in all places 
one, or utterly like ; for at all times they have been 
diverse, and may be changed according to the diver- 
sities of countries, times, and men's manners, so that 
nothing be ordained against God’s Word. Whoso- 
ever through his private judgment, willingly and pur- 


1 Vide 1 Cor. vii. 7. — Et Ambros. tom. 1, lib. 1, Offic. c. 50, seu 
ult. — Et August, tom. 6, lib. 2, de adulterinis conjugiis ad Pollen* 
tium c. 20, seu ult. 

2 Matthew xix. 12. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 319 

posely doth openly break the traditions and ceremo- 
nies of the Church which be not repugnant to the 
Word of God, and be ordained and approved by com- 
mon authority, ought to be rebuked openly (that 
others may fear to do the like) as he that otiendeth 
against the common order of the Church, and hurteth 
the common order of the magistrate, and woundeth 
the conscience of the weak brethren. 

“Every particular or national church hath authority 
to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of 
the Church, ordained only by man’s authority, so that 
all things be done to edifying.” 

EXAMINATION. 

Now — as it has been laid down in the doctrine of 
the present article, that whosoever through his pri- 
vate judgment, willingly and purposely doth openly 
break those traditions and ceremonies of the Church, 
which are not repugnant to the Word of God, and are 
ordained and approved by public authority, should 
be openly and publicly rebuked — your Church cer- 
tainly deserves to be rebuked for those crimes, which 
are imputed to such as violate the ecclesiastical rites 
and traditions. For your church doth of its private 
judgment willingly and purposely, not only violate, 
but also teach others to violate, many traditions re- 
specting sacramental rites, and other usages, approved 
of for many ages past by the practice of the Universal 
Church, as so many props to sustain human frailty 
and excite devotion — and as being calculated to pro- 
mote the divine worship, and preserve discipline and 
public concord, in order that (complying with the 
commandment of the apostle) all things may be done 
in the Church becomingly, decently, and according to 
order . 1 It would, indeed, be easy for us to prove 
that many of the traditions and ceremonies which it 
violates, are universal ; but the design of the present 
work will not allow of such a digression : for to exa- 


1 Cor. xiv. 40. 


320 


white’s confutation 


mine the doctrine of the article under discussion is all 
that is now incumbent upon us. 

Towards the conclusion of this article, your church, 
my Protestant brethren, teaches as follows : — “Every 
particular or national church hath authority to ordain, 
change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church, 
ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things 
be done to edifying.” Yes; such is the doctrine 
taught by your church — but it carries absurdity upon 
the very face of it. For as it would be absurd and 
seditious to teach, that it is lawful for an inferior 
power to change or abolish the things ordained by a 
superior one ; or to judge, by virtue of its own parti - 
cular authority, whether those things be done to edify- 
ing, which the superior power had, by public autho- 
rity, previously ordained to be done ; and as it is 
certain, that every particular or national church is 
subordinate to the universal Church : the prudent 
reader can easily perceive the degree of confusion 
which the doctrine of this article must inevitably tend 
to produce. According to the custom introduced into 
the primitive Church by the apostles, all Christian wo- 
men, married, widowed, and virgins, were obliged to 
wear veils, when assembled for prayer. Now, though 
the matter which this custom regarded was one of 
perfect indifference, and one concerning which our 
Lord had never determined any thing; yet it was not 
lawful for the particular Church of Corinth, or the 
national one of Achaia, to change or abolish this cus- 
tom. For the apostle returns the following answer to 
the Corinthians who wished to change the custom — 
and in answering the Corinthians, he likewise answers 
you, my brethren, who imitate the Corinthians in this 
respect : ‘ But if any man seem to be contentious, we 
have no such custom, nor the Church of God. n Again, 
the apostles and elders, at Jerusalem, imposed on the 
Gentiles who were converted to the faith, a decree 
concerning blood and things strangled ; 2 and this de- 


» 1 Cor. xi. 16. 


2 Acts xv. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 321 

cree they established on the ordinary ecclesiastical 
authority, which is no more than human. Could the 
particular churches of the Gentiles change the decree 
on this account 1 By no means, indeed ; but, on the 
contrary, they were obliged to guard it carefully , as 
is evident from the fifteenth and sixteenth chapters of 
the Acts of the Apostles. 1 “ Whatsoever,’’ saith St. 
Augustin, “ the Catholic Church openly practises 
throughout the world, it is the extreme of insolence 
and madness to dispute but that it should be so.” 2 

The first part of this article, concerning which we 
have as yet said nothing, may be tolerated, in case that 
it be understood of particular traditions and rites, which 
are varied according to the diversity of times and 
countries. Concerning such rites and traditions, Pope 
Gregory the First speaks in his epistle to Leander, 
when he says: “In the one faith, difference of usage 
is no obstruction to the holy Church.” 3 And before 
Gregory, St. Augustin, in his epistle to Casulanus, 
says: “Let, therefore, the faith of the Universal Church 
which is extended throughout the world — like the soul 
that is within our members — be one ; although the 
unity of the faith be celebrated with different observ- 
ances, whereby that which is true in the faith, is in 
nowise impeded. For all the glory of the king’s 
daughter is interior; but those observances, which 
are celebrated after various modes, are represented in 
her vesture — or, to use the words of the Psalmist — ‘In 
golden borders clothed round about with varieties.’ 4 
But yet this vesture of hers should admit of variety, 
only in such a way as that it be not rent by unchari- 
table strife.” 5 Such are the words of Augustin. And 
the counsel given by him in another of his epistles, 
appears to us to be most salutary as a means of guard- 

1 Acts xv. 4 1 ; and Acts xvi. 4. 

2 August, tom. 2, epist. 118, ad Januarium, c. 5. 

3 Gregor, lib. 1 , Epist. ex Regist. epist. 41, ad Leandruin episcopum, 

< Psalm xliv. 14, 15. 

b August, tom. 2. epist. 86, ad Casulanum presbyterum. 


322 


white’s confutation 


ing against those uncharitable contentions : “ There is 
no discipline,” saith Augustin, “ better adapted for a 
grave and prudent Christian, than to act in conformity 
with the usages of whatever church he may chance 
to visit. For whatsoever is enjoined, contrary neither 
to faith or morals, is to be regarded as a matter of in- 
difference, and to be complied with out of respect for 
the society of those among whom we live. I believe 
you heard this from me before, but however I now 
repeat it. When my mother, who followed me to 
Milan, found that that church did not fast on Saturday, 
she began to be disturbed, and to be doubtful what to 
do. This was at that period when I felt no concern 
about such things ; but, notwithstanding, through re- 
gard for her, I consulted on the subject with Ambrose, 
a man of most blessed memory. He answered — that 
it was not in his power to teach me any thing, but 
what he himself practised ; for that if he knew any 
thing better, he would prefer following it. And for as 
much as I should have thought, had he assigned no 
reason, that it was solely on his own authority he 
chose to advise us not to fast on Saturday, he con- 
tinued, and said to me : When I go to Rome, I fast 
upon Saturday ; when here, I do not. And let you, 
in like manner, follow the usage of whatever church 
you chance to visit — if you wish to be a scandal to 
none, and that none be a scandal to you. When I re- 
lated this advice to my mother, she willingly embraced 
it. And I, reflecting again and again on this discourse, 
always felt as though it were from a celestial oracle 
I had heard it. For I have seen — and often has the 


sight caused me to grieve and sigh — many commo- 
tions of the infirm, occasioned by the contentious 
obstinacy and superstitious timidity of certainbrethren, 
who, on matters such as I have just been advising you 
about — things that cannot possibly be decided either 
by the authority of Holy Scripture, the tradition of 
the Universal Church, or by any advantage to be 
gained for the reformation of life — raise questions as 


OF CHURCH^OF-ENGLANDISM. 323 

litigious as though they imagine nothing right, but that 
which they themselves do. These persons maintain 
the necessity of such usages, merely because they 
discover the existence of some species of reasoning 
to support them — or because such was the custom of 
their own country — or because in their travels they 
had seen such usages adopted — and they imagine that 
their knowledge must be commensurate with the ex- 
tent of their peregrinations .” 1 

But yet indeed we must carefully avoid doing any 
thing rashly and imprudently — even in changing the 
'particular traditions of our ancestors, especially those 
which have become established in any country by long 
usage. For, as St. Augustin wisely remarks: “The 
very changing of a custom, even though the change 
be recommended by its utility, does harm by its no- 
velty. Wherefore any change that is not useful, is, 
consequently, injurious — because it creates confusion, 
without conferring advantage .” 2 


CONCLUSION OF THE TREATISE, 

Wherein the Author exhorts his Protestant Brethren to 
return to the Peace of the Catholic Church. 

As we have now, my brethren, finished the discus- 
sion of those articles of your religion, which, in the 
beginning of this treatise, we undertook to examine 
in regular succession — and as we have refuted, by the 
doctrine of the Catholic Church, the schism and er- 
roneous opinions that have been founded on them — it 
may, therefore, be allowed us to beseech of you, 
through the mercy of God, to abandon your schism 
and erroneous courses, and return to the bosom of the 
mother Church : in order that with her you may 
cherish peace, faith, and charity — which latter, as the 


1 August, tom. 2, epist. 118, ad Januarium, c. 2. 

s August, tom. 2, epist. 1 18, ad Januar. c. 5. 


324 


white’s confutation 


apostle says in his epistle to the Colossians, * is the 
bond of perfection . ,J 

For so long as you continue to live ill schism , so 
long are you devoid of charity. And whosoever is in 
this state, let him do, or suffer what he will, his acts 
or his sufferings avail nothing unto his salvation. ‘If,' 
saith St. Paul, ‘ I speak with the tongues of men and 
of angels, and have not charity , I am become as a 
sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should 
have prophecy, and should know all mysteries, and 
all knowledge; and if I should have all faith so 
that I could remove mountains, and have not charity , 
I am nothing. And if I should distribute all my 
goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my 
body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth 
me nothing.’ l 2 “ What, then,” says St. Augustin, 
speaking of schismatics, “ doth it avail them, though, 
concerning the sacred mysteries, they should have 
the tongues of angels, and should prophesy even as 
Caiphas 3 and Saul , 4 men whom the Holy Scriptures 
testify to have been deserving of damnation. Or if 
they should not only know the sacraments, but likewise 
receive them, as Simon Magus did . 5 Or if they should 
confess the faith, in the same manner as the devils 
confessed Christ: for the devils did not disbelieve 
when they said — ‘What have we to do with thee, O 
Son of God, we know who thou art.’ 6 Or even though 
they should distribute their substance to the poor, as 
many, not only in the Catholic Church, but also in 
divers heresies do. Or, let us suppose some raging per- 
secution to commence, and that they, as well as we, 
should deliver their bodies to the flames for that faith 
which we in common profess ; still because they do 
these things in schism , not suffering with us in evangeli- 
cal fellowship, or from a desire to keep the unity of the 
spirit in the bond of peace 7 — in short, because they 


l Colossians iii. 14. 

* 1 Kings xviii. xix. 

7 Ephesians iv. 3. 


2 1 Cor. xiii. 1, 2, &c. 
5 Acts viii. 


3 John xi. 
3 Mark i. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


325 


have not charity together with all those other claims 
to virtue, the other advantages avail them nothing, 
and they cannot attain eternal salvation .” 1 Such are 
the words of Augustin against the Donatists. And 
the fathers of the Council of Zerta, at which Augus- 
tin was present, in an epistle to the Donatists, teach 
the very same doctrine concerning schismatics. Here 
are their words: “ Whosoever shall be separate from 
this the Catholic Church, although he may conceive 
that he is living after a laudable manner ; yet for this 
single crime — because he is disjoined from the unity 
of Christ, he shall not have life, but the wrath of God 
remaineth upon him. But whosoever shall lead a 
good life in this the Church, the sins of others are no 
prejudice to him ; for in it, as the apostle saith , 2 every 
one shall bear his own burden .” 3 And St. Cyprian, 
the Martyr, who flourished at a much earlier period, 
when speaking on the unity of the Church, says: 
“ Such persons cannot abide with God, for they would 
not be in unity with the Church of God — and though 
they should be cast into flames and fires, — or though 
they should be exposed to wild beasts, and should lay 
down their lives ; yet that will not be the crown of 
faith, but the punishment of perfidy — neither shall they 
have the glorious exit of religious virtue, but the death 
of despair. Such persons can be put to death, they 
cannot be crowned .” 4 

That which is said of schismatics is in like manner 
to be said of heretics : for heresy is among those works 
of the flesh, which exclude from the kingdom of God ; 5 
and therefore whosoever dies in heresy, being excluded 
from the kingdom of God, is by the fact condemned. 
Wherefore, on explaining the following words of the 

1 August, tom. 7, “ De Baptismo contra Donatist.” lib. 1, c. 9. 

2 Galatians vi. 5. 

3 August, tom. 2, epist. 152, ad populum factionis Donatianw, &c. 

4 Cyprianus lib. de unitate Ecclesise Catholicee. 

s Galatians v. 19, 20. 

28 


326 


white’s confutation 


Gospel — ‘ Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, 
and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against 
you, untruly, for my sake, & C .’ 1 2 Augustin saith: 
“ For merely to suffer these things is not profitable ; 
they must also be suffered for the sake of Christ, and 
must be endured with equanimity and exultation. 
For numbers of heretics — who deceive their souls by 
imagining that it is enough to bear the appellation of 
Christians — undergo many sufferings of the same kind. 
But they are excluded from the reward ; because the 
Scripture does not merely say — ‘ Blessed are they that 
suffer persecution but it also adds — * for justice sake.’* 
Where there is not sound faith, there justice cannot 
be : 4 For the just man liveth by faith. ,i! Neither let 
schismatics promise themselves any portion of this 
reward ; for, in like manner where charity is not, there 
justice cannot be: for ‘the love of our neighbour 
worketh no evil .’ 3 And if they had this love, they 
would not lacerate the body of Christ — which is his 
Church .” 4 These are the words of Augustin. 

Again, my brethren, by your persevering in schism , 
not only do you yourselves perish ; but likewise by 
gathering innumerable other souls, you scatter them — 
and by scattering them, you effect their ruin. ‘ He 
that is not with me,’ saith Christ, 4 is against me ; and 
he that gathereth not with me, scattereth .’ 5 But you, 
because you do not gather with the body, gather not 
with the head : for the head and the body is the 
whole Christ. ‘ For as the body is one,’ saith the 
apostle, ‘ and hath many members ; and all the mem- 
bers of the body, whereas they are many, yet are one 
body; so also is Christ .’ 6 “The apostle did not say,” 


1 Matthew v. 15. 

* ‘ Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice sake : for 
theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Mat. v. 10. 

2 Ilabacuc ii. 4, and Romans i. 17. 3 Romans xiii. 10. 

■t August, tom. 4, “ De Sermone Domini in Monte,” lib. 1, c. 9. 

5 Matthew xii. 30. 6 1 Cor. xii. 12. 


OP CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 


327 


observes Augustin, when weighing this passage, “so 
also is that of Christ — meaning, the body of Christ, 
or the members of Christ; but so also is Christ — 
calling the head and the body one Christ ” 1 

Moreover, they who gather not with Christ, have 
not the Spirit of Christ; for as the apostle Jude 
says: ‘These who separate themselves are sensual 
men ( animates ), having not the Spirit / 2 And the 
apostle Paul says: ‘But he that is joined to the Lord 
is one spirit / 3 Therefore, in order that you and 
your congregations, or rather the dispersions which 
adhere to you, may receive forgiveness for the sin of 
schism and the other sins of which you are guilty, as 
also that you may receive life and strength, you must 
return to that body, to which the Holy Ghost hath 
given the gift of remitting sins, and which also hath 
the faculty of imparting life and nutrition. Other- 
wise, you and your followers — as guilty of the sin of 
blasphemy against the Holy Ghost — shall (according 
to Augustin) perish for ever ; a calamity which we 
supplicate God in his mercy to avert ! Augustin, com- 
menting on the words of the Gospel respecting schis- 
matic congregations, which persevere in their schism, 
teaches at considerable length in the following words: 
“In the present lesson, taken from the Gospel of 
Saint Matthew, our Lord explained more distinctly 
what he wished to be understood by that sin which he 
calls, speaking against the Holy Ghost* For every man 
speaketh against the Holy Ghost , 4 who with impeni- 
tent heart resisteth the unity of the Church, wherein 
the remission of sins is granted by the power of the 
Holy Ghost. For, as hath been already observed, even 
they who carry and handle the sacraments of Christ, 
hut who are separated from Iiis congregation , have not 
this spirit. For in the passage where the Lord speaks 
of the division of Satan against Satan, and says that 


1 August, tom. 7, de peccatorum meritis et reinissione «id Mar- 
cellin. lib. 1, c. 31. 

2 Jude xix. 


3 1 Cor. vi. 17. 


4 Matthew xii. 32. 


328 


white’s confutation 


He cast out devils by the Holy Ghost, who is not di- 
vided against himself in spirit, as he (Satan) is — in 
the same passage, lest, through the instrumentality of 
those who, under the name of Christ, gather their 
conventicles outside his fold, any should be led to 
imagine that the kingdom of Christ is also to be 
divided against itself, our Lord continues and saith — 
‘ He that is not with me is against me ; and he that 
gathereth not with me, scattered:’* plainly showing 
hereby, that they do not belong to him, who by 
gathering outside, manifest their disposition not to 
gather, but to scatter. And then our Lord subjoins : 
4 Therefore I say to you : Every sin and blasphemy 
shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the 
Spirit shall not be forgiven.’ 2 What does this mean 1 
That blasphemy against the Spirit is the only sin 
which shall not be forgiven : for he who is not with 
Christ, is against him ; and he who gathereth not 
with him, scattereth. Yes: such is the conclusion! 
For he who gathereth not with Christ, under whatso- 
ever Christian denomination he may gather, possess- 
ed not the Holy Spirit. In this passage, Christ em- 
phatically declares — herein he compels us to under- 
stand — that the remission of every sin and of every 
blasphemy is effected no w r here, save in the congrega- 
tion of Christ, which scattereth not. For this con- 
gregation is gathered in the Spirit, which is not divided 
against itself as the unclean spirit is. And, therefore, 
all the congregations, or rather the dispersions , which 
call themselves the churches of Christ, and are divided 
and jarring amongst themselves, and inimical to the 
congregation of unity — which is the true Church of 
Christ, do not, because they seem to have his name, 
therefore belong to his congregation. For if they 
belonged to his congregation, the Holy Ghost, in 
whom this congregation is associated, should be divi- 
ded against himself But whereas this is not the case 


i Matthew xii. 30. 


2 Matthew xii. 31. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 329 

— ‘ For he that is not with Christ, is against him; and 
he that gathereth not with him, scattereth’ — therefore 
every sin and every blasphemy shall be forgiven to 
men in this congregation, which Christ gathereth in 
the Holy Ghost, who is not divided against himself. 
But blasphemy against the Spirit, which is committed 
when man with impenitent heart resisteth unto the 
end of life this so great gift of God, shall not be for- 
given. For, though a man be so opposed to the truth, 
as to struggle against God, who addresses him, not 
in the Prophets, but in his only Son — who he was 
pleased should, for our sakes, become the Son of Man, 
in order that he himself might speak to us in him — 
this shall be forgiven him : when, with penitent spirit, 
he shall have recourse to the mercy of a benign God. 
For God, because — •* He desireth not the death of the 
wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way, and 
live / 1 hath given to his Church the Holy Ghost, in 
order that whosoever should forgive sins in Him, they 
should be forgiven. But the man who continues an 
enemy to this gift — who does not seek it through 
penance, but withstands it through impenitence — in 
him this sin becomes unpardonable : not that any sin 
is of itself unpardonable, but persevering contempt 
for, or opposition to, the remission of sins, is unpar- 
donable. And a word is spoken against the Holy 
Ghost, when a man does not forsake the dispersion 
and come to the congregation , which hath received 
the Holy Ghost unto the remitting of sins.” And 
shortly after, Augustin thus concludes: “Wherefore 
there is one mode, by which the unpardonableness of 
the sin of blasphemy can be escaped, and that is by 
guarding against an impenitent heart : but it cannot 
be believed that repentance availeth any man, unless 
he be strictly united with the Church, to which the 
power of forgiving sins is granted, and wherein the 


28 * 


i Ezechiel xxxiii. 11. 


330 


white’s confutation 


unity of the Spirit is kept in the bond of peace .” 1 
Such are the plain and decisive words of Augustin. 

0 my Protestant brethren, how many dispersions 
have you caused since you ceased to gather w r ith Christ! 
Since that lamentable period, how many schisms have 
sprung up in the kingdom of England ! what sedi- 
tions have in consequence arisen throughout the entire 
island! what tumults have been excited! With how 
sad experience has your schism proved the truth of 
this declaration of our Saviour — ‘fife that gathereth 
not with me , scatter eth !’* The Church continued 
Catholic in Scotland for a considerable time after the 
Church in England had become schismatic. Mary, 
queen of Scots, professed the Catholic faith with 
firmness and constancy, and for this reason, more than 
all others, was she beheaded ! But Elizabeth, queen 
of England, together w r ith her English Church — in 
order the more effectually to promote schism, which 
she had resolved on maintaining — dispersed the Ca- 
tholic Church in Scotland ; and in order to effect this 
purpose, she (God permitting her) at first had recourse 
to dark and secret stratagem — afterwards to open and 
undisguised violence ! Queen Mary was thrust into 
prison by her subjects, who had now become infected 
with schism and seditious strifes — and, being compel- 
led to do so by terrible threats, she resigned the royal 
authority into the hands of her son. Afterwards she 
effected her escape from prison, and passed into Eng- 
land, allured thither by promises which proved falla- 
cious: for instead of faith, she met with perfidy; 
instead of comfort, a prison — wherein, after being 
closely confined for many years, she was at length 
barbarously butchered, by the advice of Parliament, 
and the authority of Queen Elizabeth — who was a cruel 
woman, but one who knew well how to conceal the 
fury of the roaring lion, beneath the cunning of the fox! 
Charles the First, also, king of Great Britain, and 

1 August, tom. 10, “De verbis Domini,” Serm. 11, versus finem. 

8 Matthew xii. 30. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM, 


331 


grandson of Mary queen of Scots, met with a like 
fate at the hands of the Independents, who had learned 
a lesson of cruelty from the precedent set them in 
the case of the unfortunate Mary! But schism, which 
has now raged and spread and extended itself, princi- 
pally owing to the exertions of you, my Church-of- 
England brethren, throughout the entire length and 
breadth of Britain, has not been confined to this king- 
dom alone; but the same contagion has also been trans- 
ported by you into Ireland. The Irish, upon whom 
divers and various arts have been practised, for the 
purpose of scattering them, have also become infected 
with schism ;* but because they have exhibited more con - 


* Our author here observes, that various arts had been resorted 
to in his time, for the purpose of sowing the seeds of schism among 
the Catholics of Ireland ; but that the Irish people by no means 
exhibited the same fickle changeableness and love of innovation as 
that which characterized the English. The same remark holds 
good at the present day. Nearly two hundred years have now 
elapsed since our author, an Englishman, and once a clergyman of 
the established church, felt bound to record this favourable testi- 
mony, proving the superior tenacity with which the Irish held to the 
faith ; and it is matter of history that, from that period to the pre- 
sent, bribery, threats, and persecution in every shape that human 
ingenuity could invent, have been resorted to for the same purpose — 
but all have, thank Heaven ! proved unavailing — and the Irish 
Catholics have come out of the ordeal more numerous, and, if pos- 
sible, more attached to the faith of antiquity than when they entered 
it. Though the bitter persecution of three hundred years has 
subjected them to wants innumerable and reduced them to a state 
of destitution unparalleled in any other country on the earth ; yet 
God, who knows how to bring good out of evil, is causing this very 
persecution to produce the richest fruits. For the poverty of the 
Catholics of Ireland, produced by protracted and systematic perse- 
cution, induces them to emigrate to every part of the known world — 
and as they, under every change of country and of clime, still remain 
attached to the ROCK of ages, on which the Church of Christ is 
built — so are they, though perhaps unconscious of it themselves, 
made the happy instruments in the hands of the Most High God, 
for rendering permanent, propagating, and extending the true Church 
of Christ. Let us, for example, take the case of England herself. 
The poverty of the Irish tradesmen and labourers obliges them to 
leave their own country and pass over to England. As the over- 
whelming majority of the Irish are Catholics, so must the proportion 
of Catholic emigrants necessarily preponderate. When they become 


332 white’s confutation 

stancy in the Catholic faith than the Britons , the dis- 
ease, therefore, has not made such formidable ravages 
among them. Moreover, as if your schism, manufac- 
tured at home, would not suffice for expediting the 
ruin of yourselves and others, foreign schismatics are 
invited into your country. The schismatic congrega- 
tions of Belgium and Gaul pour their hordes into Eng- 
land; and no sooner do they arrive than they are 
honoured and enriched with immunities and privi- 
leges. Allured by these encouragements, many from 
Belgium, Gaul, and other countries, who were either 
infamous for their schism and heresy, or notorious for 
their seditious and revolutionary spirit, flock together 
into England, and are received by you with the wel- 
come of brothers. By these means, and by such pur- 
suit after innovation, heresies have increased beyond 


sufficiently numerous in any part of England, they invariably sub- 
scribe whatever their slender means enable them, and from their 
joint contributions, raise a church wherein to have the mysteries 
of their religion celebrated. Their regular attendance at these holy 
mysteries — the distance they travel to be present at them — and the 
firm attachment they exhibit for their religion, never fail to attract 
the notice of their neighbours who differ from them in faith. The 
fatigue joyfully undergone by the Irish Catholic in walking miles 
to be present at mass on each successive Sunday, has long been an 
universal theme throughout England. By frequently talking upon 
the subject, Englishmen have been led to inquire into the nature 
and principles of the Catholic religion — and this inquiry, when in- 
stituted with a sincere desire of discovering the truth, seldom fails of 
producing ultimate conversion. This spirit of inquiry, which has been 
for a length of time slowly but steadily advancing, has now suddenly, 
and after a manner almost miraculous, extended itself over the length 
and breadth of the land — the daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly 
publications abound with articles written on the subject of Catho- 
licism — the most talented and learned doctors of the English univer- 
sities are devoting themselves with incredible zeal to the inquiry 
into the faith and usages of the primitive Christians, and the further 
their inquiries extend, the nearer do they themselves, and their nu- 
merous and influential followers, approach to Catholicity. Judging 
from the regular advances they have already made, we may fairly 
conclude, tliat when their search shall have been completed, they will, 
like the learned author of this work, have their prejudices removed, 
and will themselves piously sue to be admitted within the precincts 
‘ OF THE ONE FOLD OF THE ONE SHEPHERD.’ 


OF CHUItCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 333 

number, and schisms have become multiplied, in 
England. Independents, Seekers, Quakers, Shakers, 
Millenarians, have started into existence; and so great 
a crowd of other sects — gnostics as well as fanatics 
— have made their appearance, that England at the 
present day presents a striking picture of tartarean 
confusion. O deplorable calamity! a calamity the 
more to be deplored, because you, my brethren, see 
not your sin in the accompanying punishment which 
you are inflicting on yourselves. God punishes schism 
by multiplying schisms — and the king, at your in- 
stance, revives the parent schism. God overwhelms 
sect by the multiplying of sects — and the king, in 
compliance with your counsels, re-establishes and 
fosters the mother sect. How can he hope to banish 
schism from his own kingdom, who upholds schism in 
the kingdom of Christ, through whom kings reign, 
and reign in happiness, when all things in their king- 
doms tend to the peace and advantage of the king- 
dom of Christ — through whose grace alone they can 
enjoy happy and prosperous reigns. 

Ardent affection for the king, on whose own ac- 
count, as well as on that of his father, I have suffered 
many afflictions, does not permit me to remain silent. 
Would to God, brethren, that you would consult with 
more wholesome counsels, for your king, your king- 
dom, and yourselves! O that you would abandon 
schism and return to the peace of the Catholic 
Church ! Listen to the apostle of Christ, speaking 
through the Spirit of Christ: ‘For he is our peace, 
who hath made both one . 91 Are they with Christ, 
who of one make two, or who defend the conduct of 
those who do so ? Listen to Christ, who is our peace, 
saying: ‘ And other sheep I have that are not of this 
fold ; °them also I must bring, and they shall hear my 
voice, and there shall be one fold and one Shepherd.’ 2 
The good Shepherd, who laid down his life for his 


1 Ephesians ii. 14. 


? John x. 16. 


334 


white’s confutation 


sheep, hath one fold : and to this one fold, he bringeth 
all his sheep. Are you doubtful, my brethren, with 
respect to which this fold is ? Listen to the words 
of Christ, and they will point it out to you. These 
are the words of Christ addressed to Peter: ‘Feed 
my sheep’ — ‘Feed my lambs .’ 1 Hear these words of 
Christ, and you will find the fold. For the fold which 
he wished Peter, as his vicar, to preside over, is the 
fold of Christ ; and the sheep which Christ wished to 
be subject to Peter, his vicar, in the office of feeding 
them, belong to this fold. If you be of the sheep of 
Christ, you will follow him, leading you to his fold 
by the guidance of Peter : ‘ For his sheep follow him, 
because they know his voice. But a stranger they 
follow not, but fly from him, because they know not 
the voice of the stranger .’ 2 Show therefore, brethren, 
that you are of the sheep of Christ, by hearing the 
words of Christ, who saith to Peter: FEED MY 
SHEEP : FEED MY LAMBS * 3 He who wishes 
Peter to preside over his sheep, wishes also that his 
sheep shall be subject to Peter. Return, therefore, to 
Peter, who is your shepherd under Christ. He it is, 
who judges of the food which is wholesome for his 
sheep. He it is, who confirms through the grace of 
Christ, his brethren wavering in the faith. — ‘ Simon, 
Simon,’ saith Christ the Prince of Pastors, ‘ behold, 
Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you 
as wheat. But I have prayed for thee , that thy faith 
fail not, and thou being once converted, confirm thy 
brethren .’ 4 Wherefore Leo the Great, explaining 
these words, says : “The danger of the temptation of 
fear was common to all the apostles, and they equally 
stood in need of being aided by the Divine protec- 
tion, since the devil desired to torment them ail — 
to crush them ail to death. Notwithstanding this, the 
care of Peter is, in an especial manner, undertaken by 


1 John xxi. 16, 17. 

8 John xxi. 


2 John x. 4, 5. 

4 Luke xxii. 31, 32. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 335 

the Lord, and the faith of Peter in particular is pray- 
ed for; as if the state of the rest would be more secure, 
should the mind of their prince be rendered invinci- 
ble. In Peter, therefore, the fortitude of all is secured, 
and the aid of the Divine grace so arranged, that the 
firmness given by Christ to Peter, is by Peter confer- 
red on the apostles .” 1 

In the chair of Peter, Christ has established the 
strongest bulwark against schisms and heresies : and 
in order that he might manifest unity in his Church, 
he, of his own authority, disposed the origin of that 
same unity beginning from one. And, in consulting 
for the unity of his Church, he hath also consulted for 
her safety, which could not possibly exist without 
unity. Brethren, hear the words of St. Jerom, speak- 
ing of the chair of Peter, in his epistle to Damasus, 
who was the successor of Peter : — “ I therefore de- 
termined,” saith Jerom, “ to consult the chair of Peter, 
and the faith praised by the mouth of the apostle — and 
now to demand food for my soul, from that source, 
whence I formerly received the garments of Christ.” 
And a little further on in the same epistle, Jerom 
again says : “ Though your greatness awe me, yet 
your humanity invites me. From the priest I demand 
the victim of salvation ; from the pastor, the protec- 
tion of the sheep. Let envy depart ; let the ostenta- 
tion of Roman dignity disappear — I speak with the 
successor of the fisherman, and the disciple of the 
cross. Seeking Christ before all things, I am united 
in communion with your holiness, that is, with the 
chair of Peter : upon that rock I know the Church is 
built. Whosoever eateth the lamb outside this house, 
is a profane man .” 2 These are the words of Jerom. 
Give ear, also, to the clear and beautiful testimony of 
Augustin, respecting the firmness of the chair of Peter, 


1 Leo serm. 3, in anniversario die assumptionis ad Pontificatum. 

2 Hieron. tom. 3, epist. ad Damasum Papam de tribus hypostasi- 
bus Arianorum. 


336 


white’s confutation 


when exhorting the schismatic Donatists to return to 
the peace of the Catholic Church : “ Come unto us, 
brethren, 1 ” saith he, “ if you be desirous of being in- 
grafted on the vine. It grieveth us to see you cut off, 
and living in that inglorious manner. Reckon the 
priests, even from the very see of Peter, and in that 
order of the fathers, behold the regularity of their suc- 
cessions one to the other. That is the rock, which 
the proud gates of hell cannot overcome .” 1 Such are 
the words of Augustin. 

With what constancy did the kings and people of 
Great Britain formerly hold to the Catholic faith ! 
With what earnestness and assiduity did they propa- 
gate it at home and abroad ! Doctor James Gordon 
of Lismore, observes from the Annals of the Scotch, 
that they had eighty kings of the Catholic faith, in one' 
unbroken line. And that so fortunate were they in 
their reigns, as that during the entire of that protract- 
ed period, neither was the kingdom without a royal 
heir, or its kings without the orthodox faith — which 
they constantly and openly professed . 2 Yes : the 
Scotch reckon the full number of eighty kings from 
Donald the First to Mary queen of Scots, and grand- 
mother of Charles the Second, who is now the reign- 
ing monarch. Mary, when she could not defend with 
the sword the faith of her forefathers against the pre- 
vailing sectaries, nobly confirmed it with her blood. 
What a wide difference between Constantine the Great, 
Augustus, and Henry the Eighth, king of England ! 
The former, who was the ornament and pride of Great 
Britain — by defending the chair of Peter, and pro- 
viding it with immunities — procured an eternal glory 
for his name. But the latter — by pursuing the con- 
trary course — became the cancer of Great Britain, 
and indelibly stained his name with the everlasting 
brand of ignominy. 


1 August, tom. 7, Psal. contra partem Donati. 

2 Doctor Jacobus Gordon Lesmoreus, in opere suo chronologico. 


OF CHURCH-OF-ENGLANDISM. 337 

O happy England, if again thou wouldst embrace 
the ancient faith of the Britons, which in the spirit 
of charity they held in common with the Catholic 
Church! But unhappy so long as, treading in the 
footsteps of innovators, thou art 4 led away with cari- 
ous and strange doctrines : 1 — not ‘ careful to keep the 
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.’* Do you wish, 
brethren, to have peace and truth established amongst 
you ? If so, return to that house, which is 4 THE 
PILLAR AND THE GROUND OF TRUTH .’ 3 
Do not, by persevering in schism, continue to resist 
Christ, 4 Who is the Prince of peace . 4 He the Prince 
of peace , 4 Who is our peace, hath made both one, 
and hath broken down the middle wall of partition .’ 5 
They are not pleasing in His sight, who build up mid- 
dle walls of partition ; who make two of one, or who 
applaud the conduct of those who do so. 4 They that 
gather not with him, scatter :’ 6 For they w 7 ho will not 
gather w r ith the body, cannot gather with the head. 
They that separate themselves from the body 4 are 
sensual men, having not the spirit :’ 7 4 Now, if any man 
have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his .’ 8 

How happy was the Church, of which, in the fourth 
chapter of the Acts, we read the following description 
— 4 And the multitude of the believers had but one 
heart and one soul .’ 9 Why did such perfect unity 
reign amongst them ? Because they were blessed with 
the true faith, and with sincere charity. 44 The souls 
were many,” saith St. Augustin, “but faith made them 
one. They loved God with an inflamed charity ; and 
from a multitude , they centred into glorious unity .” 10 
Such are Augustin’s words, expressed in admiration 
of the unity of the primitive Christians. And the 
Psalmist exclaims — 4 Behold how good and how plea- 


l Hebrews xiii. 9. 
4 Isaias ix. 6. 

7 Jude 19. 

10 August, tom. 9, 

29 


2 Ephesians iv. 3. 3 1 Timothy iii. 15. 

5 Ephesians ii. M. 6 Mathew xii. 30. 

8 Romans viii. 9. 8 Acts iv. 32. 

“ De Symbolo fidei ad Catechum,” lib. 1, c. 2. 


338 


white’s confutation. 


sant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.’ 1 O 
happy they who could have such faith and such cha- 
rity ! soon would they return to unity. 

O Father of mercies ! 2 O Father of lights ! from 
whom is every best, and every perfect gift, 3 may my 
brethren, through the Spirit of truth, and for love of 
thy Son, ‘ Who is the way and the truth,’ 4 be brought 
into the way of truth. Thou, 4 who art Charity,’ 5 by 
the spirit of charity, gather them into unity, that we 
being all unanimous in the Catholic Church, may, 
with one voice, chant in canticles the greatness of 
thy mercy and of thy grace ; and offer sacrifices of 
praise to Thee, and to thy Son, and to the Holy 
Ghost, in truth and charity: for ever and ever. 
Amen. Amen. 


1 Psalm cxxxii. 1. 
4 John xiv. 6. 


2 2 Cor. i. 3. 

s John iv. 8. 


3 James i. 17. 


( 339 ) 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF THE ANCIENT FATHERS, EMPERORS 
AND HISTORIANS QUOTED IN THIS WORK. 


Flourished about the 


A year of our Lord 

Ambrose, 370 

Athanasius, 320 

Augustin, 395 

B 

Basil, (the Great), 350 

Bede, (Venerable), 710 

Bernard, 1120 

Boniface, 2d, 530 

D 

Caius, 285 

Chrysostom, 390 

Clement, (of Rome), 89 

Cornelius, 259 

Constantine the Great, 310 

Cyprian, 250 

Cyril, (of Alexandria), .... 412 
Cyril, (of Jerusalem), 310 

D 

Damasus, 379 

Dionysius, (Areopagite), 90 

E 

Epiphanius, 400 

Eusebius, (Historian), 350 

Evagrius, (Historian), 596 

F 

Fabian, 236 

Felix 2d, 368 

Felix 3d, .483 

G 

Gelasius, 492 

Gregory the Great, 590 

Gregory, (Nazianzen), 376 

Gregory, (ofNyssa), 380 

II 

Hilary, 335 

Hormisdas, 514 


Flourished about the 


Ignatius 1 .* H 2 

Innocent, 402 

Irenaeus 2.f 290 

Isidore, 630 

Jerome, 380 

Julius, 330 

Justin, (Martyr), 160 

L 

Lactantius, 320 

Leo the Great, 440 

M 

Marcellus, 304 

Martin, (Emperor), 450 

Michael 3d (Emperor), 485 

O 

Optatus, (Milev.) 365 

Origen, 240 

P 

Pacianus, 370 

Paulinus, .... 425 

Philastrius, 380 

Primatius, 540 

Prosper, 450 

R 

Ruffinus, (Historian), 390 

S 

Sozomen, (Historian), 440 

Sylvester, 314 

T 

Tertullian, 290 

Theophylactus, 170 

Theodoret, .450 

V 

Valentinian, (Emperor), 430 

Vincent, (of Liris), 440 


* Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, was condemned by the most cruel Emperor 
Trajan to be devoured by wild beasts— and this dreadful death he underwent, 
for the faith once delivered to the saints, on the 2ist of November, 116. 

f Irenteus was the disciple of Polycarp, who was the immediate disciple 
of Saint John the Evangelist. 


( 340 ) 


ALPHABETICAL LIST OF THE COUNCILS QUOTED IN THIS WORK. 

AD. 

Africa, .401 

Arausica, 1st 441 

Arausica, 2d 529 

Carthage, 1st 215 

Carthage, 2d 251 

Carthage, 3d 252 

Carthage, 4th .254 

Chalcedon, ((Ecumenical), 451 

Constantinople, 2d ((Ecumenical,) 531 

Constantinople, 3d 417 

Constantinople, 3th, ((Ecumenical), 680 

Constantinople, 21st (in which the 45 articles of John Wickleff 

were condemned) 1341 

Constance, 1st 1122 

Constance, 2d .1414 

Eliberis, 305 

Ephesus, ((Ecumenical), 431 

Florence, 1st 1005 

Florence, 2nd ((Ecumenical), 1438 

Lateran, 1st 769 

Lateran, 8th ((Ecumenical), 1139 

Milevi, 416 

Moguntinum, 846 

Neocoesarea, 427 

Nice, 1st ((Ecumenical), 222 

Nice, 2d ((Ecumenical), 787 

Sens, (Provincial) 1528 

Toledo, 1st 405 

Toledo, 11th 1565 

Trent, ((Ecumenical), 1545 to 1163 

Tribur, 895 

Trullo, 592 


ADMONITIO AD LECTOREM. 

Quoniam vari sunt editiones illorum authorum, quorum testimonia in hoc 
Tractatu allego — idcirco Authorum elenchum, cum editionibus, quibus 
inter scribendum usus sum, ordine alphabetico hie scribo. 

A. 

Adrianus 1. Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Ambrosius, Edit. Basileens. Anno Domini 1555. 

Articuli fidei Ecclesiae Anglican® Protestantium cum declaratione Regis 
annexa, Edit. Angl. A. D. 1642. 

Athanasius, Edit. Basil. A. D. 1564. 

Augustinus, Edit. Paris, A. D. 1555. 

B. 

Baronii Annales, Edit. Antverp. A. D. 1597 — 1598, &c. 

Basilius, Edit. Antverp. 1568. 


AD310NITI0 AD LECTOREM, 


• 341 


Beda, Edit. Coloniens, A. D. 1612. 

Bellarminus de Controversiis, &c. Edit. Ingolstad. A. D. 1601. 

Bernardus, Edit. Antverp. A. D. 1620. 

Bibleotheca Patrum, Edit. Colon. A. D. 1618. 

C. 

Caius Papa in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Chrysost. Edit. Basil. Anno Domini 1539. 

Clementis Romani Epist, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Clementis Rom. Constitut. Edit. Antverp. Anno Domini 1564. 
Conciliorum Tomi Edit. Colon. Anno Domini 1551. 

Concilium Trullan. in Tomis Conciliorum, Edit. Paris, Tom. 5. Anno 
Domini 1636. 

Concilium Trident. Edit. Lugdunens, Anno Domini 1631. 

Concilium Provinciale Cameracens. impress. Montibus Hannoniae. Anno 
Domini 1537. Lelebratum Veri, Anno Domini 1565. 

Cornel. Cornelii a Lapide Comment, in Acta Apost. Edit. Antverp. Anno 
Domini 1634. 

Cyprianus, Edit. Antverp. Anno Domini 1589. 

Cyrillus Alexandrin. Edit. Paris, Anno Domini 1638. 

Cyrillus Hierosolymit. in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 4. 

D. 

Damasus Papa, Tomis Conciliorum. 

Dionysius Areop. Edit. Antverp. Anno Domini 1634. 

Damascenus. Vide Joan. &c. &c. 


E. 

Epiphanius Edit. Paris, Anno Domini 1612. 

Estius Comment, in Epistolas Pauli, et reliquias Apostolorum Epistolas. 
Edit. Colon. Anno Domini 1631. 

Estius Comment, in quatuor libros Sententiarum. Edit. Duacenae, 1616. 
Evagrii, Hist. Eccles. Edit. Lovan. Anno Domini 1569. 

Eusebius Caesarcens. “ De Demonstratione Evangelica,” Edit. Basileens. 
per Henricum Pertri. 

Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. Edit. Lovan. Anno Domini 1569. 

F. 

Fabianus Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Felix II, Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

G. 

Ga^naei scholia in omnes D. Pauli Epistolas. Edit. Parisiens, Anno Domini 
° 1547. 

Gelasius Papa in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Gordonei Lesmorei opus Chronologicum, Edit. Coloniens. Anno Domini 
3,61.4. 

Gregorius Primus Papa, Edit. Parisiens, Anno Domini 1533. 

Gregorii I. Liber Sacramentorum, Edit. Parisiens, A. D. 1640. 

Gregorius Nazianzenus, Edit. Paris. A. D. 1612. 

Gergoriis Nyssemus, Edit. Paris. Anno Domini 1573. 

H. 

Hieronymus Edit. Basileens. Anno Domini 1516. 

Hilarius Pictasiens. Edit. Basileens. Anno Domini 1550. 

Hormisda Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Hosius Cordubensis inter opera Athanasii. 

29 * 


342 


ADMONITIO AD LECTOREM 


I. 

Ignatius Martyr, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. I. 

Innocentus I. Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Joannes Damacenus, Edit. Paris, Anno Domini 1603, 

Irenaeus Lugdunensis. Edit. Basileens. Anno Domini 1560. 

Isidorus Hispalens. Edit. Paris. Anno Domini 1601. 

Julius Primus Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Justinus Martyr in Bibliotheca Pat. Tom. 2. 

L. 

Leo I. Papa, Edit. Lovaniens. Anno Domini 1575. 

Lactantius, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 3. 

Liturgia Jacobi Fratris Domini, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. I. 

Liturgia Marci Evangelists, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. I. 

Liturgia Chrysostomi, inter opera ejus. 

Liturgia Basilii, inter opera ejus. 

Liturgia Gregorii I. Papae, Tom. 5. Edit. Paris, A. D. 1640. 

M. 

Marcellus Papa, in Tomis Conciliorum. 

Martiani Imperatoris, Epistola, &c. in Tomis Conciliorum, 

N. 

Nicephorus, Edit. Paris. Anno Domini 1573. 

Nicolaus Sanderus, De Schismate Anglicano, Edit. Coloniens, A. D. 1628. 

O. 

Ordo Romanus, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 8. 

Optatus Milevitanus, Edit. Paris. Anno Domini 1569. 

Origines Impress, in Praelio Ascensiano, A. D. 1522. 

P. 

Prosper Aquitanicus, Liber contra Collatorem, Edit. Lovaniens. Anno 
Domini 1565. 

Ejusdem Chronicon. Edit. Burdigal. Anno Domini 1604. 

Pacianiis, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 4. 

Primasius in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 6. Parte 2. 

Paulinus, inter opera Ambrosii, Edit. Basil. Anno Domini 1555. 
Philastrius in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 4. 1 

R. 

Remigius, in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 5. Parte 3. 

Ruffinus Hist. Eccles. Edit. Basil. Anno Domini 1557. 

S. 

Sozomenus, Hist. Ecclesiast. Edit. Lovaniens. A. D. 1569. 

Sylvius in 1. 2. &c. Edit. Duac. Anno Domini 1635. 

T. 

Tertullianus Edit. Antverp. Anno Domini 1584. 

Theophylacti Enarrationes in Evangelia, Edit. Paris. A. D. 1542. 

Ejusdem Enarrationes in omnes Pauli Epistolas, Edit. Coloniens. Anno 
Domini 1532. 

Theodoreti Hist. Eccles. Edit. Lovan. Anno Domini 1569. 

Theodoreti cajtera omnia opera. Edit. Paris. Anno Domini 1642. 

V. 

Valentiniani Imperatoris. Edictum in Tom. Conciliorum. 

Vincentius Lyrinens. in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 5. Parte 2. 

W. 

Wiggers in 2. 2. D. Thomae Comment. Edit. Lovaniens. A. D. 1630 



























. 




























. 


















. 



























































































































































































































































































































































































% 

■( 
























































































































» 




















« 








































































* 


















































, 

, * 





















• I 












- 























































































































































































































































